Appeal No. 2000-0829
Application 09/079,054
stage collapse is a known concern, or that the problem even
exists.
The examiner’s unsupported reasoning can only be based on
impermissible hindsight. To imbue one of ordinary skill in the
art with knowledge of the invention in suit, when no prior art
reference or references of record convey or suggest that
knowledge, is to fall victim to the insidious effect of a
hindsight syndrome wherein that which only the inventor taught is
used against its teacher. W.L. Gore & Assocs. v. Garlock, Inc.,
721 F.2d 1540, 1553, 220 USPQ 303, 312-13 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
Accordingly, we reverse the examiner’s rejection of claim 11
as being unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Taylor.
Claims 12 and 13
Claim 12 depends on claim 10 and recites “wherein the
modification options includes the routing of cables connected to
the lighting devices.” Claim 13 depends on claim 12 and recites
“wherein the display unit displays the cables in a selected
routing option.”
The examiner finally rejected claim 12 by arguing that
“since the lighting device can be moved, it is implicitly
included that the cables connected to the devices are rerouted.”
The examiner, in finally rejecting claim 13 argued that:
Taylor et al fail to explicitly teach the displaying of the
16
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007