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