Appeal No. 96-3744 Page 6
Application No. 08/173,764
1074, 5 USPQ2d 1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir. 1988). Rejections based
on
§ 103 must rest on a factual basis with these facts being
interpreted without hindsight reconstruction of the invention
from the prior art. The examiner may not, because of doubt
that the invention is patentable, resort to speculation,
unfounded assumption or hindsight reconstruction to supply
deficiencies in the factual basis for the rejection. See In
re Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 1017, 154 USPQ 173, 177 (CCPA 1967),
cert. denied, 389 U.S. 1057 (1968).
With this as background, we analyze the prior art applied
by the examiner in the rejection of the independent claims on
appeal (i.e., claims 1 and 16).
Trumbull '256 discloses an amusement ride. As shown in
Figure 1, the amusement ride 10 includes a passenger-holding
frame 12, a rear projection screen 16, and a motion picture
projector 18. The particular reel of film or record 22 which
is being used in the projector, contains scenes representing
the view from a rapidly moving vehicle, with the particular
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007