Appeal No. 1999-2276
Application 08/785,802
to be solved in a determination of obviousness). The Federal
Circuit reasons in Para-Ordnance Mfg. Inc. v. SGS Importers
Int’l Inc., 73 F.3d 1085, 1088-89, 37 USPQ2d 1237, 1239-40 (Fed.
Cir. 1995), that for the determination of obviousness, the court
must answer whether one of ordinary skill in the art who sets
out to solve the problem and who had before him in his workshop
the prior art, would have been reasonably expected to use the
solution that is claimed by the Appellants. However,
"[o]bviousness may not be established using hindsight or in view
of the teachings or suggestions of the invention." Para-
Ordnance, 73 F.3d at 1087, 37 USPQ2d at 1239, citing W.L. Gore
& Assocs., Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d at 1551, 1553, 220
USPQ at 311, 312-13. In addition, our reviewing court requires
the PTO to make specific findings on a suggestion to combine
prior art references. In re Dembiczak, 175 F.3d 994, 1000-01,
50 USPQ2d 1614, 1617-19 (Fed. Cir. 1999). “The combination of
elements from non-analogous sources, in a manner that
reconstructs
13
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007