Appeal No. 1998-1931
Application No. 08/395,411
In reaching our conclusion on the issues raised in this
appeal, this panel of the board has carefully considered
appellant’s specification and claims, the applied teachings,1
and
the respective viewpoints of the appellant and the examiner.
As a consequence of our review, we make the determination
which follows.
We reverse each of the examiner’s rejections under
35 U.S.C. § 103.
The skiing device of independent claim 1 and the
skiboard of independent claim 15 each require an envelope with
1In our evaluation of the applied prior art, we have
considered all of the disclosure of each document for what it
would have fairly taught one of ordinary skill in the art.
See In re Boe, 355 F.2d 961, 965, 148 USPQ 507, 510 (CCPA
1966). Additionally, this panel of the board has taken into
account not only the specific teachings, but also the
inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably have
been expected to draw from the disclosure. See In re Preda,
401 F.2d 825, 826, 159 USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA 1968).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007