Appeal No. 96-2299
Application No. 08/072,753
226 USPQ 881, 886-87 (Fed. Cir. 1985)), considering that a
conclusion of obviousness may be made from common knowledge
and common sense of the person of ordinary skill in the art
without any specific hint or suggestion in a particular
reference (see In re Bozek, 416 F.2d 1385, 1390, 163 USPQ 545,
549 (CCPA 1969)). Insofar as the references themselves are
concerned, we are bound to consider the disclosure of each for
what it fairly teaches one of ordinary skill in the art,
including not only the specific teachings, but also the
inferences which one of ordinary skill in the art would
reasonably have been expected to draw therefrom (see In re
Boe, 355 F.2d 961, 965, 148 USPQ 507, 510 (CCPA 1966) and In
re Preda, 401 F.2d 825, 826, 159 USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA 1968)).
The appellants’ invention is directed to a machine for
profiling a portion of a workpiece in response to following
along a reference surface. As manifested in independent claim
7, the machine comprises a rotary tool having a chucked shank
section, a cutter and a rotatable journal bearing provided at
a tip of the cutter and having a contact surface for making
direct contact with the reference surface of the workpiece. A
spindle for driving the tool also is recited in the claim, the
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007