Appeal No. 97-2999 Page 11
Application No. 08/338,714
Gorman, 933 F.2d 982, 986, 18 USPQ2d 1885, 1888 (Fed. Cir.
1991) (citations omitted). That is, something in the prior
art as a whole must suggest the desirability, and thus the
obviousness, of making the combination. See In re Beattie,
974 F.2d 1309, 1312, 24 USPQ2d 1040, 1042 (Fed. Cir. 1992);
Lindemann Maschinenfabrik GmbH v. American Hoist and Derrick
Co., 730 F.2d 1452, 1462, 221 USPQ 481, 488 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
In this case, it is our opinion that the teaching of Haver
that ridge 6 is shaped to engage slot 7 to firmly secure the
cuff 8 in position on the outlet 5 provides the needed
suggestion to modify Kujawski as set forth by the examiner.
Additionally, the self-evident advantages (e.g., a locking
arrangement which is much more simple and cost effective to
make) of substituting one known locking arrangement (i.e.,
bead and groove) for another known locking arrangement (i.e.,
threads) would have been readily apparent to a person of
ordinary skill in the art.4
4An artisan must be presumed to know something about the
art apart from what the references disclose (see In re Jacoby,
309 F.2d 513, 516, 135 USPQ 317, 319 (CCPA 1962)) and the
conclusion of obviousness may be made from "common knowledge
and common sense" of the person of ordinary skill in the art
(see In re Bozek, 416 F.2d 1385, 1390, 163 USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007