Appeal No. 2006-2084
Reexamination Control No. 90/006,360
recited in claims 5, 10, and 11. The 60° countersink angle of the head meets the
limitation of "approximately 52° through 68°" in claims 6 and 12, and the
particular angle of "60°" in claims 7 and 13.
Again, the arguments about commercial success and copying have been
considered, but are not entitled to any weight. Mr. Fountaine's statements in ¶¶ 8-9
of the declaration of June 3, 1997, are more relevant to the present rejection
because the present rejection relies on reducing the dimensions of the insert.
However, Nikcole and Kyocera demonstrate that one of ordinary skill in the art
knew that a tool shank and tool insert with the dimensions claimed would work.
Therefore, Mr. Fountaine's declaration is not persuasive.
Accordingly, modification of Max Bar or ETCO to provide an 8 mm width
shank and 0.250 IC diameter insert and 2.5 mm diameter 60° screw as taught by
Kyocera makes obvious the subject matter of claims 1-19.
(3)
Third, one of ordinary skill in the machine tool art seeking to design an
8 mm vertical small-shank tool that overcomes the problem of the prior art 8 mm
tool in Fig. 1, would have been motivated to start with a known solution as taught
- 66 -
Page: Previous 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007