Appeal 2007-0009
Application 10/345,461
1 simple matter, notwithstanding the beveled ends, the parts have a
2 friction fit with each other. (Pettit, col. 1, ll. 24-29).
3 6. It is further disclosed that when assembled, the fence will be
4 extremely sturdy to prevent the parts from rattling when subjected
5 to wind forces, but the parts will be able to move relative to each
6 other to allow for expansion and contraction. (Pettit, col. 1, ll. 17-
7 23).
8 7. Bars 30 and 31 prevent removal of subassemblies 26 from the
9 posts. (Pettit, col. 4, ll. 41-43).
10 8. Ribs 43 are formed on inside surfaces of cap 37, and result in caps
11 being held in position "with a good tight friction fit." (Pettit, col. 5,
12 ll. 5-19).
13 9. Gerstner discloses a fence having what appears to be abutting rails
14 as shown in Fig. 3.
15 10. Bright discloses a fence having rails and posts made of steel.
16 (Bright, col. 3, ll. 30 and 31).
17
18 PRINCIPLES OF LAW
19 On appeal, Appellant bears the burden of showing that the Examiner
20 has not established a legally sufficient basis for combining the teachings of
21 the applied prior art. Appellant may sustain this burden by showing that,
22 where the Examiner relies on a combination of disclosures, the Examiner
23 failed to provide sufficient evidence to show that one having ordinary skill
24 in the art would have been motivated to combine the references as suggested
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013