Appeal No. 95-4590
Application 08/056,188
(answer, page 3), we are of the opinion that one of ordinary
skill in the art would have found it obvious to provide the
Seasafe #4055 bag with a plug-type closure member and seal of
the type seen in Eckert so as to provide an absolutely
airtight and watertight closure therein and thereby protect
the contents of the bag from damage by water, as
is taught in Eckert. As for appellants' argument that the
Eckert patent itself is silent concerning the deformable neck
portion of the bag, we must agree. However, we note, as the
examiner has, that it is the Seasafe #4055 bag which includes
the deformable neck portion and that it is the combined
teachings of the references which must be considered in an
obviousness determination. That is, the test for obviousness
is what the combined teachings of the references would have
suggested to those having ordinary skill in the art. See
Cable Electric Products, Inc. v. Genmark, Inc., 770 F.2d 1015,
1025, 226 USPQ 881, 886-887 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Kaslow,
707 F.2d 1366, 1375, 217 USPQ 1089, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 1983); In
re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425, 208 USPQ 871, 881 (CCPA 1981).
15
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007