Appeal No. 1997-3676
Application 08/237,221
rejection. As our reviewing court stated in In re Fritch, 972
F.2d 1260, 1266, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1992):
It is impermissible to use the claimed
invention as an instruction manual or
"template" to piece together the teachings
of the prior art so that the claimed
invention is rendered obvious. This court
has previously stated that "[o]ne cannot
use hindsight reconstruction to pick and
choose among isolated disclosures in the
prior art to deprecate the claimed
invention" (citations omitted).
We therefore will not sustain the rejection of independent
claim 49 or of claims 51, 53, 54 and 56, which depend
therefrom.
The same reasoning applies, and we reach the same
conclusion, with regard to the rejection of claims 50, 52 and
55, which was on the basis of the references applied in the
other rejection, taken further in view of Berlin, for the
final reference fails to overcome the problem set out above.
SUMMARY
Neither rejection is sustained.
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007