Appeal No. 2006-2084
Reexamination Control No. 90/006,360
disclosed. However, one skilled in the art would have been motivated to use any
known insert mounting arrangement for small shank tools, such as the 2.5 mm
countersunk head screw taught in the profiling tool of Kyocera, which would meet
these limitations. One of ordinary skill in the art had sufficient knowledge of the
design of profiling and vertical tools to apply the fastener and mounting teachings
of one to the other.
We have determined that the declaration of commercial success by the
inventor Mr. Fountaine submitted December 31, 2004, and the portion of
Mr. Fountaine's declaration of June 3, 1997, dealing with commercial success
(¶¶ 10-14) are not entitled to any weight. We have also determined that counsel's
argument about copying by others is not entitled to any weight. Mr. Fountaine's
declaration of June 3, 1997, contains the following statements why the claimed
invention would not have been obvious:
8. Based on my experience and knowledge in the machine tool
industry, despite the clear problems of the prior art brazed, club foot and
other small-shank tools, there were several factors dictating against the
solution of my invention. The carbide insert and the end of the shank
supporting the insert are subjected to tremendous forces during machining
operations. In light of this, I was concerned (as I believe were others in the
industry) that constructing an insert with reduced dimensions as recited in
the claims would substantially weaken the insert and fail to provide the
- 60 -
Page: Previous 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007