Ex Parte BERANEK - Page 4




            Appeal No. 2002-1517                                                                              
            Application No. 08/927,660                                                                        


            837 F.2d 1071, 1074, 5 USPQ2d 1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir. 1988).  Rejections based on                   
            § 103 must rest on a factual basis with these facts being interpreted without hindsight           
            reconstruction of the invention from the prior art.  The examiner may not, because of             
            doubt that the invention is patentable, resort to speculation, unfounded assumption or            
            hindsight reconstruction to supply deficiencies in the factual basis for the rejection.  See      
            In re Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 1017, 154 USPQ 173, 178 (CCPA 1967), cert. denied,                   
            389 U.S. 1057 (1968).  Our reviewing court has repeatedly cautioned against employing             
            hindsight by using the appellant's disclosure as a blueprint to reconstruct the claimed           
            invention from the isolated teachings of the prior art.  See, e.g., Grain Processing              
            Corp. v. American Maize-Products Co., 840 F.2d 902, 907, 5 USPQ2d 1788, 1792                      
            (Fed. Cir. 1988).                                                                                 
                   When determining obviousness, "the examiner can satisfy the burden of showing              
            obviousness of the combination ‘only by showing some objective teaching in the prior              
            art or that knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art would lead          
            that individual to combine the relevant teachings of the references.’"  In re  Lee,               
            277 F.3d 1338, 1343, 61 USPQ2d 1430, 1434 (Fed. Cir. 2002), citing In re Fritch,                  
            972 F.2d 1260, 1265, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1783 (Fed. Cir. 1992).  "Broad conclusory                    
            statements regarding the teaching of multiple references, standing alone, are not                 
            'evidence.'"  In re Dembiczak, 175 F.3d 994, 999-1000, 50 USPQ2d 1614, 1617 (Fed.                 
            Cir. 1999). "Mere denials and conclusory statements, however, are not sufficient to               

                                                      4                                                       





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007