Appeal No. 97-3070
Application 08/584,097
In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425, 208 USPQ 871, 881 (CCPA
1981). Moreover, artisans 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
1969)). Additionally, skill is presumed on the part of those
practicing in the art. See In re Sovish, 769 F.2d 738, 743,
226 USPQ 771, 774 (Fed. Cir. 1985). With these authorities in
mind, we now turn to the specific rejections before us for
consideration.
Considering first Rejections (1), (3), (4) and (5),
Vincent discloses an easel "for supporting a canvas or other
blank on which a painting is to be made" (column 1, lines 7-
9), a supporting element 10 which can be considered to be
substantially vertical (see Fig. 2), a holding element (the
friction plate, of the "pair" of friction plates which forms
the swivel connection 32, which is fastened to the supporting
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007