Appeal 2007-2658
Application 10/451,143
can take account of the inferences and creative steps that a person of
ordinary skill in the art would employ.” KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 127
S. Ct. 1727, 1740-41, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007) quoting In re Kahn,
441 F.3d 977, 988, 78 USPQ2d 1329, 1336-37 (Fed. Cir. 2006); see also
DyStar Textilfarben GmBH & Co. Deutschland KG v. C.H. Patrick Co., 464
F.3d 1356, 1361, 80 USPQ2d 1641, 1645 (Fed. Cir. 2006)(“The motivation
need not be found in the references sought to be combined, but may be
found in any number of sources, including common knowledge, the prior art
as a whole, or the nature of the problem itself.”); In re Bozek, 416 F.2d 1385,
1390, 163 USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA 1969)(“Having established that this
knowledge was in the art, the examiner could then properly rely, as put forth
by the solicitor, on a conclusion of obviousness ‘from common knowledge
and common sense of the person of ordinary skill in the art without any
specific hint or suggestion in a particular reference.’”).
PRIMA FACIE CASE OF OBVIOUSNESS
Applying the above principles of law, we determine that the prior art
relied upon by Examiner would have rendered the claimed subject matter
prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art within the meaning of
35 U.S.C. § 103. As is apparent from the Answer and the Brief, there is no
dispute that Yuichi or Okamoto teaches copper-base amorphous alloys,
inclusive of the claimed copper-base amorphous alloys. Indeed, the
Appellants acknowledge (Br. 8) that:
JP 10-175082 [Yuichi] discloses use of amorphous alloy foil
containing 10-50 atom % of at least one of Ti, Zr, and Hf and
remainder of Cu. The amorphous alloy can further contain 0.1-
10 atom % of at least one of V, Nb, Cr, Mo, Mn, and Ni.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013