Appeal No. 2001-0180
Application No. 08/887,421
suggested the stated use or function of the recited grommet
means to position the raft under a vehicle and/or tether the
front and rear ends of the raft to a stationary object in
flood waters.
A conclusion of obviousness may be based on common
knowledge and common sense of the person of ordinary skill in
the art without any specific hint or suggestion in a
particular reference. In re Bozek, 416 F.2d 1385, 1390, 163
USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA 1969). In the present case, the
examiner’s conclusion that it would have been obvious to add
grommets to the front and rear ends of the Curcio raft to
permit it to be anchored or tethered to a stationary object is
reasonable as a simple matter of common sense in view of the
officially noticed old and conventional practice of providing
rafts with tethering grommets. Although the appellants are
correct in pointing out that the examiner’s rationale does not
address the functional recitations in claim 17 that the
grommet means are “for positioning said raft under a vehicle
and/or tethering the front and rear ends of said raft to a
stationary object in flood waters,” the law does not require
that references be combined for the reasons contemplated by
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007