Appeal No. 98-0363
Application 08/740,389
may not pick and choose from any one reference only so much of
it as will support a given position (i.e., that a single point
contact is provided between the free end of the screen and the
sash), to the exclusion of other parts necessary to the full
appreciation of what such reference fairly suggests to one of
ordinary skill in the art. See Bausch & Lomb, Inc., v.
Barnes-Hind/Hydrocurve Inc., 796 F.2d 443, 448, 230 USPQ 416,
419 (Fed. Cir. 1986) and In re Kamm, 452 F.2d 1052, 1057, 172
USPQ 298, 301-02 (CCPA 1972).
The examiner has stated that the proposed combination of
Golkowski and Carman would cut down on material and
installation costs; however, the mere fact that this might be
the case does not serve as a proper motivation or suggestion
to combine the teachings of Golkowski and Carman. Instead, it
is the teachings of the prior art which must provide the
motivation or suggestion to combine the references. See In re
Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1266, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1783-84 (Fed.
Cir. 1992). Here, we find no such suggestion.
As to rejection (2), we have carefully reviewed the
teachings of Wootten, but find nothing therein which would
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007