Appeal No. 2002-0912 Page 4
Application No. 08/913,187
references themselves; a conclusion of obviousness may be made from common
knowledge and common sense of the person of ordinary skill in the art without any
specific hint or suggestion in a particular reference. See In re Bozak, 416 F.2d 1385,
1390, 163 USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA 1969). Further, in an obviousness assessment, skill
is presumed on the part of the artisan, rather than the lack thereof. In re Sovish,
769 F.2d 738, 743, 226 USPQ 771, 774 (Fed. Cir. 1985). Insofar as the references
themselves are concerned, we are bound to consider the disclosure of each for what it
fairly teaches one of ordinary skill in the art, including not only the specific teachings,
but also the inferences which one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably have
been expected to draw therefrom. See In re Boe, 355 F.2d 961, 965, 148 USPQ 507,
510 (CCPA 1966) and In re Preda, 401 F.2d 825, 826, 159 USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA
1968).
Claim 1 reads as follows:
1. A guide bush for holding a workpiece rotatably and axially
slidable on an automatic lathe at a position near a cutting tool, having an
inner surface to be in sliding contact with the workpiece coated with a
hard carbon film, the hard carbon film being formed on an intermediate
layer formed on the inner surface to enhance the adhesion of the hard
carbon film on the inner surface.
The examiner is of the view that all of the subject matter recited in claim 1 is disclosed
by Yamada, except that Yamada utilizes hard metal inserts on the inner surface for
holding a workpiece instead of the hard carbon film formed on an intermediate layer on
the inner surface, as recited in the claim. However, the examiner is of the opinion that
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007