Appeal No. 2000-0863 Page 6
Application No. 08/760,303
foam hanger pad having a layer of a dimensionally stable
material laminated thereto (see pages 1-2 of the
specification) are not appreciated by the prior art applied by
the examiner.5
Instead, it appears to us that the examiner relied on
hindsight in reaching his obviousness determination. However,
our reviewing court has said, "To imbue one of ordinary skill
in the art with knowledge of the invention in suit, when no
prior art reference or references of record convey or suggest
that knowledge, is to fall victim to the insidious effect of a
hindsight syndrome wherein that which only the inventor taught
is used against its teacher." W. L. Gore & Assoc. v. Garlock,
Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1553, 220 USPQ 303, 312-13 (Fed. Cir.
1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984). It is essential
that "the decisionmaker forget what he or she has been taught
5The examples provided on pages 9-10 of the answer
supporting the examiner's taking of Official Notice have not
been considered by this panel of the Board since they were not
included in the rejection. See In re Hoch, supra. Moreover,
it appears to us that the appellant is correct as
characterizing these examples as non-analogous art (reply
brief, p. 2).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007