Appeal No. 2000-1298
Application 08/938,779
as the resiliently deformable material for making the closure
plug in Knocke, such artisan would not then have found any
teaching/suggestion in the applied references for also
providing the resiliently deformable closure plug of Knocke
with a braze clad on at least one side thereof. As urged by
appellants, the concepts involved in the resiliently
deformable plug of Knocke and the plastically deformable
partition of Gire are so fundamentally different as to be
mutually incompatible and to thus strongly militate against
their combination.
With respect to the examiner’s rejection, we note that,
as our court of review indicated in In re Fritch, 972 F.2d
1260, 1266, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1783 (Fed. Cir. 1992), it is
impermissible to use the claimed invention as an instruction
manual or "template" to piece together isolated disclosures
and teachings of the prior art so that the claimed invention
is rendered obvious. That same Court has also cautioned
against focussing on the obviousness of the differences
between the claimed invention and the prior art rather than on
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007