Appeal No. 2006-1867
Application No. 10/820,259
show a series of ribs looping around the body," as presently
claimed (page 5 of Answer, last sentence). However, it is the
examiner's position that one of ordinary skill in the art would
have found it obvious "to form the ribs provided in any conven-
tional design, particularly in view of Bickford, which teaches a
threaded surface (readable on the claimed "series of loops") for
making an integral attachment with a second plastic body" (id.).
Upon thorough review of the Onoda and Bickford disclosures,
we share appellants' view that impermissible hindsight is
necessary to combine the teachings of Onoda and Bickford in the
manner submitted by the examiner. As explained by appellants,
threaded surface 28 of Bickford is for the purpose of screwing
the insulating body 14 into the pressure bulkhead 26, and not
for providing a mating surface for the claimed overmolded fuel
flange. Appellants correctly point out that "[t]he rib 8a of
the primary molded body 6 of Onoda is not intended to be screwed
into anything; such as the screw threads 28 of Bickford"
(sentence bridging pages 2 and 3 of Reply Brief). In essence,
we agree with appellants that the threaded surface 28 of
Bickford would not have motivated one of ordinary skill in the
art to modify the surface of Onoda's primary molded body 36 in
the manner claimed for mating with secondary molded body 37.
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007