Appeal No. 2006-1990 Παγε 8
Application No. 10/678,231
find that the reference relates to artificial eyes for use in
toys such as dolls, and for use in mannequins (col. 1, lines 6-
8). The lens (cornea 24) may be colored or pigmented to
eliminate the iris 22 (col. 4, lines 21 and 22).
Turning to Deeg, the reference is not drawn to an artificial
eye as asserted by the examiner (answer, page 3). Rather the
reference is drawn to a replacement lens for a natural eye. As
illustrated in Figure 1, replacement lens 10 is secured to iris
14 by connectors 16, 18. Deeg discloses that there is an ongoing
need and search in the art for a desirable way to reduce the net
weight of implantable lenses (col. 1, lines 28-30). Deeg
discloses the use of a plurality of natural and synthetic
materials to use for the replacement lenses (see the table at the
bottom of column 2). From the disclosure of Nasca as being
directed to an artificial eye for a doll, and the disclosure of
Deeg of the need to reduce the weight of a replacement lens
for use in a human eye, we find no motivation to combine the
teachings of the references because there is no disclosed or
suggested need of reducing the weight of the replacement eye in a
doll. The doll is inanimate, and would not be affected by a
higher weight of the artificial eye used. Accordingly, we agree
with appellants for the reasons set forth in the brief, as
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007