Appeal No. 97-4206
Application 08/662,263
approximately a 90E angle and has effectively a zero radius of
curvature on the inside corner (see Figs. 1-3). Taken as a
whole, the teachings of the admitted prior art and Rohrer '143
establish that the provision of generally perpendicularly-
extending flanges on the ends of spring arms having (1) a
radius of curvature on the inside corner and (2) effectively a
zero radius of curvature on the inside corner, are art-
recognized alternatives which are well known, and the
respective advantages and disadvantages of each would have
been apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art. See, e.g.,
In re Heinrich, 268 F.2d 753, 756, 122 USPQ 388, 390 (CCPA
1959). Applying the test for obviousness as set forth in In 4
re Keller, 642 F.2d at 425, 208 USPQ at 881, we are convinced
that one of ordinary skill in this art would have found it
obvious to provide the flange 318 of the admitted prior art
with an effectively zero radius of curvature on the inside
corner in view of the teachings of Rohrer '143.
4 The test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference
may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary 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.
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007