Appeal No. 2002-1102
Application No. 09/329,591
effect of a hindsight syndrome wherein that which only the
inventor taught is used against its teacher.” W. L. Gore &
Assoc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1553, 220 USPQ 303, 313
(Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984). It follows
that we cannot sustain the examiner’s section 103 rejection of
claims 10 and 13-17 as being unpatentable over the admitted prior
art, Swallow, Dickinson, McBrayer and Chen.2
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
REVERSED
Edward C. Kimlin )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
Bradley R. Garris ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
Beverly A. Pawlikowski )
Administrative Patent Judge )
BRG:tdl
2
2 In light of our disposition of this appeal, no need exists
for discussing the Swallow, Dickinson and Chen references or the
examiner’s obviousness conclusion with respect thereto.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007