Appeal No. 95-0340
Application 07/771,685
mere fact that the prior art may be modified in the manner
suggested by the Examiner does not make the modification obvious
unless the prior art suggested the desirability of the
modification." In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1266 n.14, 23 USPQ2d
1780, 1783-84 n.14 (Fed. Cir. 1992), citing In re Gordon, 733
F.2d 900, 902, 221 USPQ 1125, 1127 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
"Obviousness may not be established using hindsight or in view of
the teachings or suggestions of the inventor." Para-Ordnance
Mfg., 73 F.3d at 1087, 37 USPQ2d at 1239, citing W. L. Gore, 721
F.2d at 1551, 1553, 220 USPQ at 311, 312-13.
We have not sustained the rejection of claims 1 through 20
under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Accordingly, the Examiner's decision is
reversed.
REVERSED
JAMES D. THOMAS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007