Appeal No. 2002-0543 Page 9
Application No. 09/118,629
2. Obviousness Determination
"'A prima facie case of obviousness is established when the teachings from the
prior art itself would . . . have suggested the claimed subject matter to a person of
ordinary skill in the art.'" In re Bell, 991 F.2d 781, 783, 26 USPQ2d 1529, 1531 (Fed.
Cir. 1993) (quoting In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1051, 189 USPQ 143, 147 (CCPA
1976)). "'[T]he test is what the combined teachings of the references would have
suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art.'" Cable Elec. Prods., Inc. v. Genmark,
Inc., 770 F.2d 1015, 1025, 226 USPQ 881, 886-87 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (quoting In re
Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425, 208 USPQ 871, 881 (CCPA 1981)).
Here, we find that Kashiwagi teaches actuating a light for a period of time in
response to a triggering signal. Specifically, "turning on of the pressure switch 50 or 60
causes an illumination lamp 70 incorporated in the switch unit 21 to be lighted up for a
prescribed time period (15 seconds, for instance), and it is turned off automatically
thereafter." Col. 4, ll. 45-49. We further find that Takabe also teaches actuating a light
for a period of time in response to a triggering signal. Specifically, "when one infrared
sensors 5 is turned on [it], the pilot lamp 4 in the corresponding only lighting zone turns
on only the fixed time by which a timer setup was carried out. . . ." Takabe
Translation, ¶ 0028 (emphasis added).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007