Appeal No. 1999-0212
Application No. 08/230,526
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 skull fiducial
marker apparatus that is positioned on the patient solely by
virtue of being held between the patient’s teeth. As
manifested in claim 1, the invention comprises a custom
mouthpiece for attachment to the maxilla of a patient, a
projection extending forward from the mouthpiece, a curved U-
shaped bar removably connected to the projection and having
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007