Appeal 2007-2198
Application 10/324,181
a conclusion of obviousness may be made 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. See In re Bozek, 416 F.2d 1385,
1390, 163 USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA 1969). Further, in an obviousness
assessment, skill is presumed on the part of the artisan, rather than the lack
thereof. In re Sovish, 769 F.2d 738, 742, 226 USPQ 771, 774 (Fed. Cir.
1985). Also, we are bound to consider the disclosure of each reference for
what it fairly teaches one of ordinary skill in the art, including not only the
specific teachings, but also the inferences which one of ordinary skill in the
art would reasonably have been expected to draw therefrom. See In re Boe,
355 F.2d 961, 965, 148 USPQ 507, 510 (CCPA 1966); and In re Preda,
401 F.2d 825, 826, 159 USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA 1968).
Giving representative claim 1 its broadest reasonable construction
when read in light of the Specification as it would be understood by one of
ordinary skill in the art, we determine that a generally columnar shape as
required by representative claim 1 is inclusive of a variety of geometrically
designed columnar forms, including pyramidal columnar forms as taught or
suggested by Turi.
Based on the above, we understand the Examiner’s position to be that
it would have been within the province of one of ordinary skill in the art to
determine a workable height and base ratio for the projections of the forming
apparatus of Turi based on consideration of other known forming projection
heights, such as the ridge height of Shimalla while taking into account the
differences in their respective shapes and the desired film surface to be
obtained in the use of such a forming device. In so doing, and based on
routine experimentation, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013