Appeal No. 2001-0088 Page 4
Application No. 09/271,571
this rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103. See page 5 of the
appellants' brief.
The test for obviousness is what the combined teachings
of the references would have suggested to one of ordinary
skill in the art. See In re Young, 927 F.2d 588, 591, 18
USPQ2d 1089, 1091 (Fed. Cir. 1991) and In re Keller, 642 F.2d
413, 425, 208 USPQ 871, 881 (CCPA 1981). Moreover, in
evaluating such references it is proper to take into account
not only the specific teachings of the references but also the
inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be
expected to draw therefrom. In re Preda, 401 F.2d 825, 826,
159 USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA 1968).
Claim 16
We sustain the rejection of claim 16 under 35 U.S.C. §
103.
Claim 16 reads as follows:
An adjustable pedal apparatus adapted to be mounted
on a vehicle structure for a motor vehicle comprising:
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007