Appeal No. 2005-0245 Page 5
Application No. 09/848,032
combustion engines in the art related to internal combustion engines. Gopp provides a solution:
power the engine with alternating cylinders so that the engine can be cooled by drawing fresh air
through the deactivated cylinders. The benefit of incorporating this solution into the hybrid
vehicle of Kitada would have been readily apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art as it would
allow the hybrid electric vehicle to operate even when it is overheating and the battery is dead.
The Examiner has established that there was a reason, suggestion, or motivation to make the
combination which was grounded in the prior art. Such evidence shows that the rejection is not
based upon improper hindsight reconstruction.
The contentions of Appellant do not persuade us of reversible error in the Examiner’s
position. We conclude that the Examiner has established a prima facie case of obviousness with
respect to the subject matter of claims 15-18 which has not been sufficiently rebutted by
Appellant.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the Examiner to reject claims 15-18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
is affirmed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007