Appeal No. 2000-1914
Application No. 08/718,643
A reading of the Deyoreo document makes it abundantly clear to
us that the patentee’s focus (column 1, lines 6 through 19 and
column 2, lines 32 through 40) was upon an insect killer or
attracting device which employs a light source to attract
insects.
Based upon the overall teaching of Deyoreo alone, as
relied upon by the examiner in the rejection of independent
claims 1, 11, 31, 40 and 48, it is apparent to us that only
impermissible hindsight and reliance upon appellants’ own
teaching would have enabled one having ordinary skill in the
art to so alter and reconfigure the insect killer of the
applied patent to yield the now claimed invention with it’s
particular feature of a flow of insect attractant. Turning
now to the other rejections, inclusive of the rejection of
remaining independent claim 28, the examiner relies upon
features found in the respective teachings of Butler (carbon
dioxide as an attractant) and Bible (mesh screen).
Notwithstanding the particular features relied upon by the
examiner in these additional references, it is quite apparent
to us that the deficiency of the Deyoreo reference is not
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007