Appeal No. 1999-1959 Page 7
Application No. 08/881,586
also provide radiopaque material in the proximal sleeve 34 of
De Toledo in order to achieve the objective of permitting
confirmation of the distal portion of the guide wire. Thus,2
in our view, one skilled in the art, in the interest of
economy, would have been led by the teachings of Miyano to
incorporate pulverized radiopaque material in only the sleeve
32 of De Toledo.
In that appellants’ claim 28 does not require that the
proximal and distal jacket portions abut one another, we
consider the sleeves 32, 34, joined by coupling sleeve 24, to
be a “plastic jacket,” as recited in claim 28, with the sleeve
32 responding to the distal jacket portion and the sleeve 34
responding to the proximal jacket portion. The provision of
radiopaque material only in the sleeve 32 would enhance the
radiopaque properties of the sleeve 32 relative to the sleeve
34, as also required in claim 28.
For the foregoing reasons, we agree with the examiner’s
While there must be some suggestion or motivation for one of ordinary2
skill in the art to combine the teachings of references, it is not necessary
that such be found within the four corners of the 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 Bozek, 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).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007