Appeal No. 2001-1982
Application 08/892,716
flash and the CRT and allow the seating surface to fit snugly
against the CRT. The dependent claims are discussed separately.
The APA and Arai are representative of the level of ordinary
skill in the art. See In re Oelrich, 579 F.2d 86, 91,
198 USPQ 210, 214 (CCPA 1978) ("the PTO usually must evaluate
both the scope and content of the prior art and the level of
ordinary skill solely on the cold words of the literature");
In re GPAC Inc., 57 F.3d 1573, 1579, 35 USPQ2d 1116, 1121 (Fed.
Cir. 1995) (the Board did not err in adopting the approach that
the level of skill in the art was best determined by the
references of record); Okajima v. Bourdeau, 261 F.3d 1350, 1355,
59 USPQ2d 1795, 1797 (Fed. Cir. 2001) ("[T]he absence of specific
findings on the level of skill in the art does not give rise to
reversible error 'where the prior art itself reflects an
appropriate level and a need for testimony is not shown.'"). In
addition, we find that one of ordinary skill in the manufacturing
art would have known that it was desirable to design articles to
eliminate manufacturing steps.
One of ordinary skill in the art, facing the problem in the
APA that flash protrusions on the seating surface of a housing
where a CRT is mounted are undesirable because they interfere
with close mating contact, would have been motivated by the
solution to this general problem in Arai to recess the gate
landings to recess the flash protrusion below the seating surface
- 7 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007