Appeal No. 2004-0116 Page 6
Application No. 09/966,307
In our view, the only suggestion for modifying DePoint in the manner proposed
by the examiner to meet the above-noted limitations stems from hindsight knowledge
derived from the appellants' own disclosure and not from the combined teachings of the
applied prior art. The use of such hindsight knowledge to support an obviousness
rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is, of course, impermissible. See, for example, W. L.
Gore and Assocs., Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1553, 220 USPQ 303, 312-13
(Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the examiner to reject claims
160 to 173 and 194 to 204 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007