Appeal No. 1996-1598 Page 4
Application No. 08/206,743
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellants' specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the
examiner. Upon evaluation of all the evidence before us, it
is our conclusion that the evidence adduced by the examiner is
insufficient to establish a case of obviousness with respect
to independent claim 1. Accordingly, we will not sustain the
examiner's rejection of claim 1, and claims 2 to 13, 15 to 22
and 25 to 30 dependent thereon, under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Our
reasoning for this determination follows.
The test for obviousness is what the combined teachings
of the references would have suggested to one of ordinary
skill in the art. See In re Young, 927 F.2d 588, 591, 18
USPQ2d 1089, 1091 (Fed. Cir. 1991) and In re Keller, 642 F.2d
413, 425, 208 USPQ 871, 881 (CCPA 1981). Furthermore, the
conclusion that the claimed subject matter is obvious must be
supported by evidence, as shown by some objective teaching in
the prior art or by knowledge generally available to one of
ordinary skill in the art that would have led that individual
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007