Appeal No. 1998-3413
Application No. 08/512,782
regard, it is readily apparent from the relative sizing seen
in Figure 4 of Coleman that a second pot of like shape and
dimensions to the pot (18) seen in Figure 4, with or without
an attached collar, would be nestible in the first pot and
collar combination (10, 18) by having the bottom portion of
the second pot inserted into the central opening in the collar
of the first pot.
Appellant’s arguments on pages 26 and 27 of the brief
regarding claims 1 and 2 on appeal are not convincing, because
under 35 U.S.C. § 103, a reference must be considered not only
for what it expressly teaches, but also for what it fairly
suggests (In re Burckel, 592 F.2d 1175, 1179, 201 USPQ 67, 70
(CCPA 1979); In re Lamberti, 545 F.2d 747, 750, 192 USPQ 278,
280 (CCPA 1976)), as well for as the reasonable inferences
which the artisan would logically draw from the reference.
See In re Shepard, 319 F.2d 194, 197, 138 USPQ 148, 150 (CCPA
1963). In addition, while there clearly must be some teaching
or suggestion to combine existing elements in the prior art to
arrive at the claimed invention, we note that it is not
necessary that such teaching or suggestion be found only
11
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007