Appeal No. 96-2190
Application 08/287,758
one day, and the clock out time is projected for that
designated date. [Column 5, lines 18 through 34]. The
Examiner has not pointed out any specific place in Chalker
where it is contemplated to perform the calculation for
keeping track of the remaining work hours during a determined
period of greater than one day. We are also unable to so
find. We believe that Chalker’s system is indeed quite
sophisticated and is probably capable of accomplishing what
Appellant is doing, but we would be speculating if we so
construed it. The Federal Circuit states that “[t]he mere
fact that the prior art may be modified in the manner
suggested by the Examiner does not make the modification
obvious unless the prior art suggested the
desirability of the modification.” In re Fitch, 972 F.2d
1260, 1266, n.14, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1783-1784, n.14 (Fed. Cir.
1992), citing In re Gordon, 733 F.2d 900, 902, 221 USPQ 1125,
1127 (Fed. Cir. 1984). “Obviousness may not be established
using hindsight or in view of the teachings or suggestions of
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007