Appeal No. 2001-1343
Application No. 08/965,818
invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the
references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings
of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary
skill in the art. In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425, 208 USPQ
871, 881 (CCPA 1981).
In the present case, it would have been prima facie
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide
Bernard’s ratcheting tool with a low-torque fluid driven
rotary motor, associated fluid flowlines and a valve member as
recited in representative claim 77 in view of the Figure 4
embodiment disclosed by Thompson. Thompson’s teaching of the
speed and efficiency benefits afforded by a socket wrench tool
having both low and high torque motors would have provided the
artisan with ample suggestion or motivation for this
modification. The appellant’s criticisms of this reference
combination are not persuasive because they essentially rest
on the inaccurate assumption that Thompson is the primary
reference proposed to be modified in view of Bernard. The
related argument that the references do not teach or suggest a
pressure activated valve of the sort recited in appealed
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007