Appeal No. 2002-0394 Page 5
Application No. 09/169,074
basis. In re Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 1017, 154 USPQ 173, 178 (CCPA 1967), cert.
denied, 389 U.S. 1057 (1968).
For the foregoing reasons, it is our opinion that the combined teachings of
Phillips and Hanson are insufficient to establish a prima facie case of obviousness3 of
the subject matter of claims 1, 34 and 37. It follows that we cannot sustain the
examiner’s rejection of claims 1, 34 and 37, or claims 2-6, 8-11, 13, 14, 16, 18-26, 35,
36, 38-42, 44-47, 49, 50 and 52-57 which depend either directly or indirectly therefrom,
as being unpatentable over Phillips in view of Hanson.
3 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).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007