Appeal No. 2003-0187
Application No. 09/134,109
circular cradles of the tool receiving member of Hanson “since
both shapes would work equally well with the insert [sic, tool to
be retained therein].”
Appellants contend (brief, page 7) that the examiner has
again utilized impermissible hindsight to pick and choose
elements from among the various references and combine them is a
selective way to arrive at the claimed subject matter. We agree.
There is simply no teaching, suggestion or motivation in the
applied references which would have led one of ordinary skill in
the art to a modification of the molded plastic drill bit
container of Hanson so as to have both a plurality of V-shaped
cradles and retaining finger mechanisms of the type required in
claim 39 on appeal. While Gühring has V-shaped cradles for the
miniature drill bits therein, it clearly teaches away from having
any form of tool retaining finger mechanism of the type shown in
Hanson and required in appellants’ claim 39, because of the high
probability of breakage of the miniature drill bits when such
drill bits must be removed from the container.
As for Vasudeva (Fig. 9), we are at a loss as to exactly
what structure the examiner considers to be “V-shaped tool
15
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007