Appeal No. 2005-1393
Application No. 09/751,609
displacement of the distal portion of leg 24, all that is
required is that leg 24 of Nagy experience some, or any,
displacement when subjected to any mechanical shock to meet the
claimed invention.
As for separately argued claim 14, appellant has not
addressed the examiner's finding that member 46 is a magnet
holder, and that member 46, together with leg 24 and a portion of
the clamp as 28, 30 and 32, all constitute a single molded
structure (see page 10 of Answer).
Concerning the recitation in claim 10 that "the resilient
member limits acceleration of the paintbrush to no more than 0.75
g," we agree with the examiner that it would have been a matter
of obviousness for one of ordinary skill in the art to determine
the design of the resilient member which optimizes the
acceleration of the paintbrush. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 276,
205 USPQ 215, 219 (CCPA 1980).
As a final point, we note that appellant bases no argument
upon objective evidence of nonobviousness, such as unexpected
results.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing and the reasons well-
stated by the examiner, the examiner's decision rejecting the
appealed claims is affirmed.
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007