Appeal No. 1999-1763
Application No. 08/834,931
Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1553, 220
USPQ 303, 313 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851
(1984). Since we have determined that the examiner’s
conclusion of obviousness is based on hindsight reconstruction
using appellant’s own disclosure as a blueprint to arrive at
the claimed subject matter, it follows that we will not
sustain the examiner’s rejection of appealed claims 2 and 3
over Price.
Claims 4 through 8 on appeal all ultimately depend from
claim 2. Accordingly, since the teachings and suggestions
found in Price would not have made the subject matter as a
whole of claim 2 obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art
at the time of appellant’s invention, it follows that
dependent claims 4 through 8 would likewise have been
unobvious over Price. Therefore, we also refuse to sustain the
examiner’s rejection of dependent claims 4 through 8 under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a).
THE ISSUE OF STATUTORY SUBJECT MATTER
12
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007