Appeal No. 1999-1535 Page 10
Application No. 08/752,220
In our view, the only suggestion for modifying Horning in
a manner to meet the above-noted limitation stems from
hindsight knowledge derived from the appellants' own
disclosure. The use of such hindsight knowledge to support an
obviousness rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is, of course,
impermissible. See, for example, W. L. Gore and Associates,
Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1553, 220 USPQ 303, 312-
13 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
For the reasons stated above, the decision of the
examiner to reject claims 19 through 36 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
is reversed.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject
claims 29 and 30 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, is
affirmed and the decision of the examiner to reject claims 19
through 36 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007