Appeal No. 2000-1766
Application No. 09/095,029
advanced by the appellant and the examiner. As a consequence of
our review, we make the determinations which follow.
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).
We turn first to the examiner’s rejection of claims 1, 2, 5
and 10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Cooper. In
support of this rejection the examiner finds that Cooper discloses
a library having books or data storage devices mounted on shelves
or magazines 40. The examiner finds that the magazines are
removable from first and second opposite ends of a bin or shelving
assembly 60 in which they are mounted. The examiner recognizing
that Cooper does not disclose storage trays for supporting the data
storage devices states:
. . . it would have been obvious for one of ordinary
skill in the art to have modified the apparatus of Cooper
by utilizing the magazines to hold other types of data
storage devices, such as CD’s, videotapes, cassettes,
etc., which are commonly supported in a storage tray when
not in use, as this would be a simple design expediency,
the use of which in the apparatus of Cooper would require
neither undue experimentation nor produce unexpected
results. [final rejection at page 3]
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007