Ex parte CHRISTENSON - Page 10




                 Appeal No. 2000-0006                                                                                    Page 10                        
                 Application No. 08/868,480                                                                                                             


                 stems from hindsight knowledge derived from the appellant's                                                                            
                 own disclosure.   It follows that we cannot sustain the2                                                                                                           
                 examiner's rejections of claims 3, 5, 6, 12, 15, 26, 31 to 33,                                                                         
                 36, 39, 40 and 46.                                                                                                                     


                                                                   CONCLUSION                                                                           
                          To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject                                                                          
                 claims 3, 5, 6, 12, 15, 26, 31 to 33, 36, 39, 40 and 46 under                                                                          
                 35 U.S.C.  103 is reversed.                                                                                                           
                                                                    REVERSED                                                                            





                                            NEAL E. ABRAMS                                        )                                                     
                                            Administrative Patent Judge                           )                                                     
                                                                                                  )                                                     
                                                                                                  )                                                     
                                                                                                  )                                                     
                                                                                                  ) BOARD OF PATENT                                     
                                            JEFFREY V. NASE                                       )     APPEALS                                         
                                            Administrative Patent Judge                           )       AND                                           
                                                                                                  )  INTERFERENCES                                      

                          2The 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).                                                                                






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007