Appeal No. 2005-0911 Page 7
Application No. 09/923,113
With respect to the appellant’s argument as to the different applications of
McCall’s grip and Tindall’s tubular cushion, we note first that McCall’s teachings are
expressly not limited to writing implements. As discussed above, McCall points out that
the deformable grip may be applied to, inter alia, “other manual implements with
working tips, for example, paint brushes, jeweler’s tools, and other devices” (column 4,
lines 7-12). Shears having working cutting tips would certainly appear to fall within the
confines of these applications. Further, the appellant’s characterization on page 6 of
the brief that writing instruments are gripped with steady pressure during use while
shears are repeatedly opened and closed, alternately applying pressure to the finger
loops and then relaxing that pressure, at best, overstates the differences between the
manners of gripping these implements. In using a writing implement, a user directs the
movement of the implement in part by applying varying amounts of pressure from the
thumb, index and middle fingers contacting the implement. The gripping pressure is
thus not necessarily as steady as the appellant would have us believe. Likewise, the
opening and closing motion of using shears does not result in a full release of pressure
alternating with pressure application. In any event, while we appreciate that the
gripping action of a user of shears differs from that of a user of a writing implement,
much as the gripping action of a user of a writing implement differs from that of a user of
the other manual implements with working tips to which McCall contemplates
applicability of the disclosed deformable grip, McCall’s teaching of the advantages of a
customized contour and reduction in user fatigue provided by McCall’s deformable grip,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007