Appeal No. 2000-1339
Application 08/772,480
cotton plants with the wick applicator. Van Steen
buttresses Robertson’s teaching that wick applicators of
the type at issue here can be used to apply chemicals to
cultivated plants (such as the cotton plants disclosed by
Robertson). Thus, the appellant’s position (see pages 3
through 10 in the brief) that the proposed combination of
Robertson, Clark and Van Steen rests on impermissible
hindsight is not persuasive. The various arguments
advanced by the appellant in support of this position are
predicated on the individual deficiencies of each of the
references with respect to the claimed subject matter.
It is well settled, however, that non-obviousness cannot
be established by attacking references individually where
the rejection is based upon the teachings of a
combination of references. In re Merck & Co., Inc., 800
F.2d 1091, 1097, 231 USPQ 375, 380 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Thus, the combined teachings of Robertson, Clark and
Van Steen justify the examiner’s conclusion that the
differences between the subject matter recited in claim 1
and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a
11
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007