Appeal No. 96-3555
Application No. 08/297,021
washing system as suggested by Weihe and Clague. The economic
advantage of recirculating rinse water as well as providing
stations for pre-wash, wash, rinse and final rinse are well known
expedients in this art as shown by Weihe and Clague. Thus,
contrary to the appellants' arguments, it is our view that the
examiner did not engage in the use of impressible hindsight in
rejecting claim 51.
We note that the appellants' arguments concerning (1) the
separation of the zones from each other (brief, pp. 12 and 15),
(2) the degree of cleanliness achieved (brief, pp. 12-13),
(3) air curtains (brief, pp. 15-16), and (4) demagnetizing the
blades (brief, pp. 16-17) are not commensurate in scope with
claim 51. Additionally, as to the argued deficiencies of each
reference on an individual basis, we note that 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. Inc., 800 F.2d 1091, 1097,
231 USPQ 375, 380 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
11
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007