Appeal No. 1997-2245 Page 11
Application No. 08/402,872
would result from the proposed modification, and not reasons
as to why the proposed modification would have been considered
obvious to a skilled artisan. Obviousness may not be
established using hindsight or in view of the teachings or
suggestions of the inventor. Para-Ordnance Mfg. V. SGS
Importers Int’l, 73 F.3d 1087, 37 USPQ 2d at 1239 (Fed. Cir.
1995), citing W. L. Gore & Assocs., v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d
at 1551, 1553, 220 USPQ at 311, 312-13 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
Accordingly, the rejection of claim 1 is reversed. As the
other independent claim 8 contains similar language, the
rejection of claim 8, as well as dependent claims 5 and 12, is
reversed.
Turning next to the rejection of claims 2-4, 6, 7, 9-11,
13, and 14, the examiner additionally relies upon the
teachings of Golden for the claimed electronic flux-gate
compass. The examiner's position (final rejection, page 5) is
that Golden discloses a method and apparatus for locating a
medical tube in the body of a patient. The tube includes a
magnet which is located by a detection apparatus which senses
the static magnetic field gradient. The sensors used by
Golden include SQUID and flux-gate. According to the examiner
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007