07-P6 book-pp79-90_12_Layout 1 19/08/2019 14:26 Page 89
7. And what about inventive step? Did you see that the circular saw could have been ‘formed of a steel strip’? Could the sheet used to make the circular blades, which is one blade wide and ten blades long be a strip? If it is a strip, is the blade ‘formed of a steel strip’? You can see there is some room to argue here, but is it relevant? Even if the circular blade is formed of a steel strip, is the circular saw blade a blade ‘for a bowsaw’? Of course, in a real FD4 examination you would have the circular saw to consider when doing novelty, and the point of ‘formed of a steel strip’ would have to be discussed at that time. So, there are various possible ‘obviousness’ attacks. The blade of Fig 1 can be the prior art, and that can be combined with the tooth layout of the circular saw. The bandsaw can be combined with the circular saw (depending on your construction of ‘for’ in claim 1). The bandsaw can be combined with Figure 1.
Infringement and Validity • 2018
89
