Appeal No. 2006-2406 Παγε 8
Application No. 10/745,113
Appellants assert (reply brief, page 2) that “[t]here is no
suggestion, since the covers protect the blade as well as the
pulleys when it is contact with the ground, to hang the Dean saw
above the ground. To do so would combine a teaching which Dean
clearly teaches away from.” It is argued (id.) that the examiner
totally ignores the entire teaching of Bennett and zeros in on
one particular item. It is additionally argued that there is no
motivation to combine the two references because the two
references do not address the same problem.
From our review of we find, for the reasons which follow,
that the combined teachings of Dean and Bennett would have
suggested to an artisan the invention of claim 1. From our
review of Dean, we find that the reference is directed to a
coping saw that has either reciprocating saw blades or a
continuous loop blade. Dean discloses that the saw blade is a
continuous loop blade (col. 4, line 51). It is further disclosed
that the saw blade, instead of being a continuous loop, can be
independent blade segments that reciprocate (col.14, lines 44-
49). From the disclosure of a continuous loop blade we find that
Dean discloses, in at least one embodiment, a band saw. Dean
further discloses that the housing is preferably formed from
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007