Ex parte KOBAYASHI et al. - Page 10




          Appeal No. 96-0005                                                          
          Application 07/722,599                                                      


          plurality of seats” beyond all reason.  Terms in a claim should             
          be interpreted in a manner consistent with the specification and            
          construed as those skilled in the art would construe them (see In           
          re Bond, 910 F.2d 831, 833, 15 USPQ2d 1566, 1567 (Fed. Cir.                 
          1990), Specialty Composites v. Cabot Corp., 845 F.2d 981, 986, 6            
          USPQ2d 1601, 1604 (Fed. Cir. 1988) and In re Sneed, 710 F.2d                
          1544, 1548, 218 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1983)).  Here, we can              
          think of no circumstances where the artisan, consistent with the            
          appellants’ specification, would construe the folded over cover             
          66 of Metcalf to form a plurality of seats.  This being the case,           
          we will not sustain the examiner’s rejection of claim 16 under              
          35 U.S.C.  102(b) as being anticipated by Metcalf.                         
               Considering next the rejection of claim 3 under 35 U.S.C.              
           103 as being unpatentable over Metcalf in view of Yamaoka, the            
          appellants argue that the jet propulsion unit of Yamaoka is in a            
          “conventional” boat and not in the combination of a powered and             
          unpowered hull as claimed.  Such a contention is not persuasive             
          inasmuch as nonobviousness cannot be established by attacking the           
          references individually when the rejection is predicated upon a             
          combination of prior art disclosures.  See In re Merck & Co.,               
          800 F.2d 1091, 1097, 231 USPQ 375, 380 (Fed. Cir. 1986).  Here,             
          the examiner has relied upon the primary reference to Metcalf for           

                                         -10-                                         




Page:  Previous  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007