Ex parte DORI - Page 4




          Appeal No. 96-2779                                                          
          Application 08/151,944                                                      


          means of hand tools to strike the pattern in the concrete                   
          (column 1, lines 24-26).  In this regard, Moorhead states:                  
                    Hand stamping tools have been increased in size                   
               to effectuate coverage of broad areas.  However, the                   
               process is relatively time consuming because of the                    
               fact that a man can only impress a limited amount of                   
               concrete as to the square footage that is being                        
               impressed.  This [Moorhead’s] invention overcomes                      
               the limitations of hand stamping concrete by                           
               providing a continuously rolling impressment.                          
               [column 1, lines 55-62]                                                
          Specifically, Moorhead provides a tractor-like apparatus which              
          includes a roller 16 having a surface 17 comprising ribs or                 
          blades 18 arranged in the pattern to be impressed into the                  
          concrete for continuously rolling impressment of the pattern.               
               The test for obviousness is not whether the features of                
          one reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of              
          another reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must                
          be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references.                 
          Rather, the test is 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).  Moreover, a conclusion of obviousness may be                  
          based on common knowledge and common sense of the person of                 


                                          -4-                                         





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007