Appeal No. 2006-2084
Reexamination Control No. 90/006,360
than approximately 70% of the diameter of the inscribed circle," as recited in
claims 1 and 2; and a fastener aperture with a "maximum diameter within the range
of approximately 3 mm through 4.5 mm," and a countersunk head "having a
maximum diameter within the range of approximately 3 mm through 4.5 mm," as
recited in claims 10 and 11, and 5. 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 not persuasive as to the present rejection
because the present rejection relies on Nikcole and Kyocera, which teach that an
8 mm shank width and an insert with an IC diameter smaller than the shank width
so as to provide an elongated body portion of at least 1 mm will, in fact, work.
Therefore, Mr. Fountaine's declaration is not persuasive.
Accordingly, the subject matter of claims 1-19 would have been
alternatively obvious over the combination of Nikcole as modified in light of
Max Bar, ETCO, and Kyocera .
- 69 -
Page: Previous 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007