Appeal No. 2006-2084
Reexamination Control No. 90/006,360
by the 8 mm vertical tool in Nikcole. A person of ordinary skill in the art having
Nikcole, Max Bar, and ETCO before him or her, would have been motivated to
modify Nikcole to use inserts which fully engage the tool-supporting surfaces of
the recess without any substantial portion of the two sides extending beyond the
tool-supporting surfaces, as recited in claims 1, 10, and 16, given the express
teachings of this configuration in Max Bar and ETCO. A person of ordinary skill
in the art having Nikcole, Max Bar, and ETCO before him or her, would have been
motivated to modify Nikcole to use 35° inserts in a 35° recess, as recited in
claims 2, 11, 17, and 18, given the express teachings of 35° vertical inserts in
Max Bar and ETCO. It is not required that the advantages of the design of 35°
inserts which fully engage the sides be described in the references to establish
motivation: it is sufficient that Max Bar and ETCO teach that the features were
known. Since the inventor was the president of Max Bar, he would have been
aware of the technical advantages of the design.
Nikcole must have an inscribed circle diameter equal to or less than the
7 mm width of the tool insert. This meets the limitations of an "inscribed circle
having a diameter less than approximately 90% of the shank width," as recited in
- 67 -
Page: Previous 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007