Appeal No. 1996-3918
Application No. 08/232,351
pending application and the references therein and (3) that,
to his knowledge, "no one has, or even suggested modifying the
vertical slide structure as is exemplified in . . . Cramblett
. . . with a direct mount of the rim to the slide structure"
and (4) "[i]t was not obvious to me in September, 1992 to make
such a combination." Even if we were to agree that the above-
noted credentials establishes the declarant to be an expert in
the art, the declaration merely sets forth the conclusory
opinion that it would not have been obvious to combine the
teachings of the references, rather than facts as to why this
might be the case. Affidavits and declarations fail in their
purpose when they recite conclusions with few facts to
buttress the conclusions. See In re Brandstadter, 484 F.2d
1395, 1406, 179 USPQ 286, 294 (CCPA 1973), In re Thompson, 545
F.2d 1290, 1295, 192 USPQ 275, 277-78 (CCPA 1976) and In re
DeBlauwe, 736 F.2d 699, 705, 222 USPQ 191, 196 (Fed. Cir.
1984). Moreover, while it is proper to give some weight to a
persuasively supported statement of one skilled in the art on
what was not obvious to him or her, obviousness is a question
of law which we must decide (see In re Weber, 341 F.2d 143,
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007