Appeal No. 96-3035
Application 07/945,430
Claim 8 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Goncalves (French document) in view of Cardia
(European document) and von Schuckmann (German document).
The full text of the examiner's rejection and response
to the argument presented by appellants appears in the answer
(Paper No. 27), while the complete statement of appellants’
argument can be found in the brief (Paper No. 26).
OPINION
In reaching our conclusion on the obviousness issue
raised in this appeal, this panel of the board has carefully
considered appellants’ specification and claims, the attach-
ments to appellants’ brief including the statement (declaration)
of Robert W. Chadfield dated September 1, 1994, the applied
teachings, and the respective viewpoints of appellants and the3
3In our evaluation of the applied teachings, we have
considered all of the disclosure of each teaching for what it
would have fairly taught one of ordinary skill in the art. See
In re Boe, 355 F.2d 961, 965, 148 USPQ 507, 510 (CCPA 1966).
Additionally, this panel of the board has taken into account not
only the specific teachings, but also the inferences which one
skilled in the art would reasonably have been expected to draw
from the disclosure. See In re Preda, 401 F.2d 825, 826, 159
USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA 1968).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007