Appeal No. 1996-2388
Application No. 08/147,485
We find no error, however, in our initial finding
(Decision, page 9) of the obviousness to the skilled artisan
of using an adhesive as part of a securing measure to attach a
window pane to a vehicle frame. An artisan must be presumed
to know something about the art apart from what the references
disclose (see In re Jacoby, 309 F.2d 513, 516, 135 USPQ 317,
319 (CCPA 1962)) and the conclusion of obviousness may be made
from "common knowledge and common sense" of the person of
ordinary skill in the art (see In re Bozek, 416 F.2d 1385,
1390, 163 USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA 1969)). Moreover, skill is
presumed on the part of those practicing in the art. See In
re Sovish, 769 F.2d 738, 742, 226 USPQ 771,
774 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
Similarly, we find no error in our original finding that
the Examiner was correct in concluding that, once the skilled
artisan has chosen an adhesive securing measure to attach a
pane to a vehicle frame, it is only good engineering practice
to establish the soundest grounded connection, i.e., by using
a conductive adhesive. In considering the disclosure of a
reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific
teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007