Appeal No. 2000-0503 Page 9
Application No. 08/902,031
the art would have appreciated from Toth's disclosure in column 1, lines 52-60, and column 2,
lines 13-32, that suitable materials for the container apparatus should be corrosion-resistant,
relatively light-weight and sufficiently strong to satisfy the testing requirements of organizations
such as ISO and AAR and would have selected a "stainless steel, aluminum or similar material"
possessing such features. Thus, we conclude that to have constructed the container apparatus
of Toth using either 5000 series or 6000 series aluminum alloy based upon its suitability for
such use in accordance with the teachings of Toth would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art.5
For the foregoing reasons, we are satisfied that the evidence relied upon by the
examiner is sufficient to establish a prima facie case of obviousness of the subject matter of
claim 83.
With regard to the examiner's rejections of claims 108-144, appellants have elected not
to separately argue the patentability of the dependent claims apart from independent claims 108,
121 and 132 from which they depend. Therefore, we shall decide the appeal of the rejections
of these claims on the basis of representative claims 108, 121 and 132, with claims 109-120
5Mere selection of a known material based upon its suitability for the intended use has been held to be
obvious. See In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 199, 125 USPQ 416, 418 (CCPA 1960).
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007