Appeal No. 2006-2116
Application No. 08/879,517
altering the conventional desk-top cutting machines depicted in
Figures 6 and 7 of appellant’s specification and described by Ito
in accordance therewith.
We have considered all of appellant’s evidence and arguments
to the contrary. We have exercised extreme caution in our studies
of the drawings in Johnson, Langworthy and Ambrosio. Because we
cannot presume that the prior art figures are drawn to scale, we
focus and rely more on the written descriptions of the subject
matter the prior art describes. Therefore, we grant substantial
10 weight to Johnson’s teaching that the cutting machines therein
described have a +45 degree cutting capability (Johnson, col. 5,
l. 13-15; col. 7, l. 9-12). We grant substantial weight to
Langworthy’s utilization of well known or standard type electric
motors and disk type saws and instruction that various sizes of
each may be used to adapt the composite to different conditions
(Langworthy, p. 1, l. 71-76). We find little or no objective
evidence in Johnson, Langworthy or Ambrosio which would lead us to
understand that persons having ordinary skill in the art would not
have understood the materials necessary and/or the modifications
20 required to make and use inexpensive desk-top cutting machines of
the kind appellant claims with reasonable expectation of
22
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007