Appeal No. 2002-0282
Application 09/363,407
OPINION
In reaching our conclusion on the obviousness issue raised
in this appeal, this panel of the board has carefully considered
appellants’ specification and claims, the applied patent,1 and
the respective viewpoints of appellants and the examiner. As a
consequence of our review, we make the determination which
follows.
This panel of the Board does not sustain the examiner’s
rejection on appeal for the reasons appearing below.
We focus our attention upon appellants’ independent claim
11.
1 In our evaluation of the applied reference, we have
considered all of the disclosure of the patent 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).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007