Appeal No. 98-0904
Application No. 08/500,033
have been motivated to combine the disparate teachings of
Whiteside, Kahl and O'Neill in the manner proposed by the
examiner. In our view, the examiner has impermissibly relied
upon the appellant's own teachings in arriving at a conclusion
of obviousness. As the court in Uniroyal, 837 F.2d at 1051, 5
USPQ2d at 1438 stated "it is impermissible to use the claims
as a frame and the prior art references as a mosaic to piece
together a facsimile of the claimed invention."
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007