Appeal No. 1998-1772 Page 5
Application No. 08/578,047
sufficient to establish a case of obviousness only with
respect to claim 1. Accordingly, we will sustain the
examiner's rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. We
will not sustain the examiner's rejection of claims 2, 4, 11
and 12 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). Moreover, in
evaluating such references it is proper to take into account
not only the specific teachings of the references but also the
inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be
expected to draw therefrom. In re Preda, 401 F.2d 825, 826,
159 USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA 1968). 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
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007