Appeal 2007-2844
Application 09/829,032
art as a means of attaching a post to a base, whether the base include a collar
or another post (see, e.g., Cragg, Figure 27). Thus, the ordinary artisan
would have recognized that one could place an aperture in the collar of the
support member, wherein the aperture lines up with one of the spaced-apart
through-holes of the post, and then use a fastener to hold the post in an
aligned, uptight position. KSR, 127 S. Ct. at 1740, 82 USPQ2d at 1396
(2007) (“[I]f a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person
of ordinary skill would recognize that it would improve similar devices in
the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its application is beyond
his or her skill.”)
CONCLUSION
In summary, we find that the Examiner has set forth a prima facie case
of obviousness, and the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) are affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
Ssc
GIFFORD, KRASS, SPRINKLE, ANDERSON & CITKOWSKI, P.C.
PO BOX 7021
TROY, MI 48007-7021
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6
Last modified: September 9, 2013