Appeal No. 2007-0999
Application No. 10/600,280
Claim 3
Claim 3 further requires that “said interlocking structure comprises at
least one elastically deformable, inwardly directed protrusion on said
housing.”
The Examiner asserts that Briggs “clearly teaches an iris structure that
interlockingly engages the medical apparatus by elastically deforming
inwardly.” (Answer 5.)
We agree with Appellants that there would have been no motivation
to have modified Sigler’s interlocking slit with Briggs’ teaching of an iris
structure for engaging a medical apparatus. Sigler’s disinfectant container
works by inserting the pacifier nipple into the sponge. It sterilizes the
pacifier by requiring the user to move it “up and down,” “sideways,” or
“circular” within the slit (Col. 2, ll. 6-13). The “engaging” slit is therefore
integral to the Sigler’s disinfectant container, it being the structure necessary
for the container to achieve its purpose in disinfecting a pacifier. Because
Sigler’s slit serves as the structure for engaging, there would have been no
motivation to have utilized another engaging structure, such as the iris-
shaped structure of Briggs. It would be redundant. The Examiner’s position
is deficient because it does not explain what would have motivated the
skilled worker to have substituted Sigler’s slitted sponge with Briggs’s iris
in a decontamination device.
Because we have found no motivation to have utilized Brigg’s iris on
Sigler’s disinfectant container for a pacifier, we reverse this rejection.
10
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013