Appeal No. 2004-0024
Application No. 09/249,922 Page 12
used if that were indeed the case,” because there is no evidence
of record that Gaus was aware of Cockram's invention.
Nor are we persuaded by appellants' assertion (reply brief,
page 7) that “Gaus specifically criticizes, and thus teaches away
from, the use of multi-component electronic control of metal
halide bulbs: 'In the past, the operation of metal halide bulbs
was electronically conrolled with current control
circuitry...Unfortunately, the current control circuitry is very
bulky, includes a high number of components, and is
expensive...To be commercially viable, the control and ignition
systems of the lamp must be relatively inexpensive.' Gaus, col.
2, lines 40-41; 48-50; 56-58.” As stated by our reviewing court
in In re Gurley, 27 F.3d 551, 553, 31 USPQ2d 1130, 1131 (Fed.
Cir. 1994):
A reference may be said to teach away when a person of
ordinary skill, upon [examining] the reference, would be
discouraged from following the path set out in the
reference, or would be led in a direction divergent from the
path that was taken by the applicant.
The fact the current control circuitry used in the prior art was
bulky, expensive, and required a high number of components
neither refers to a microprocessor controller nor teaches away
from the use of a microprocessor controller.
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007