Appeal No. 96-1256
Application 08/257,080
he had intended the airbag accommodating
armrest to be carried by the seat, he would
have referenced the seat supported airbag
17.
Appellant further discusses the advantages of having an airbag
in an armrest mounted on the seat, rather than on the door, in
that the armrest moves with (maintains the same position
relative to) the occupant of the seat, and there is less
chance of its being displaced by a side impact.
Appellant’s arguments are not persuasive. While
Sinnhuber does not expressly disclose that the armrest in
which the airbag is "accommodated" is carried by the seat, as
claimed, the test of obviousness is not whether the claimed
invention is expressly suggested in any one or all of the
references, but rather what the combined teachings of the
references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in
the art. In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425, 208 USPQ 871, 881
(CCPA 1981). In the present case, we agree with the examiner
that since Sinnhuber discloses placing an airbag "in an
armrest of the seat," this would have suggested to one of
ordinary skill in the art placing an airbag in any vehicle
armrest, whether it be located on the door or, as in the
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007