Appeal 2007-2783
Reexamination 90/005,509
Patent 5,533,499
attorney argument on the issue. The patentee submitted no declaration
testimony in connection with any alleged benefits whether or not expected
by one with ordinary skill in the art, regarding a narrowed center segment
over the bridge of the nose.
The patentee further asserts that the embodiment shown in Figure 2D
of Iriarte teaches away from having a narrowed intermediate segment
because in that embodiment the truss is actually wider and thicker in the
center portion. The teaching away assertion is misplaced because the
embodiment of Figure 2D is merely one of many alternatives disclosed by
Iriarte and does not in the least suggest that the center segment cannot be
made narrower in some other embodiment for a different purpose.
For reasons discussed above, the patentee has not shown that the
Examiner failed to make out a prima facie case of obviousness with respect
to claims 34, 51, 54, and 55.
With regard to the third argument, the specification nowhere describes
what benefits or advantages can be achieved by having the body of the truss
made of plastic. 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 truss body be made of plastic.
19
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013