Appeal 2007-2783
Reexamination 90/005,509
Patent 5,533,499
intermediate segment of the truss narrower in width than the spaced apart
end surfaces of the truss. The patentee also submitted no declaration
testimony from anyone with at least ordinary skill in the art explaining what
benefits or advantages may be achieved by having the intermediate segment
of the truss narrower in width than the spaced apart end surfaces of the truss.
On this record, whether the intermediate segment of the truss is narrower in
width than the ends of the truss is of no functional significance and merely
results in a difference in appearance, and the narrower intermediate segment
is no more special than an intermediate segment having the same width as
the ends of the truss.
On page 4 of Iriarte, from lines 13-16, it is stated:
Given the description which the foregoing report provides, it is
necessary to stress that the details of the design of the idea set
out may vary, that is to say that they may be subject to slight
alterations, always based on the fundamental principles of the
idea, which are essentially those reflected in the paragraphs of
the description give[n].
Given that the width of the intermediate segment is of no disclosed
functional significance in the specification of the patentee’s involved patent,
and in light of the above-quoted text from Iriarte, the patentee has shown no
error in the Examiner’s decision regarding a narrower intermediate segment
as a routine variation within the fundamental principles disclosed by Iriarte.
17
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013