Appeal No. 2004-0462
Application 09/915,861
which would have led one of ordinary skill in the art at the time
of appellants’ invention to modify the electric powered vehicle
of Lake in the manner urged by the examiner based on the
teachings of the hydrogen fuel vehicle disclosed in Peschka. In
that regard, it is our opinion that the examiner has used the
hindsight benefit of appellants’ own disclosure to pick and
choose elements or concepts from the distinctly different systems
of the applied references, and then selectively combine the
chosen disparate elements or concepts in an attempt to
reconstruct appellants’ claimed subject matter. However, as our
court of review indicated in In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1266,
23 USPQ2d 1780, 1783 (Fed. Cir. 1992), it is impermissible to use
the claimed invention as an instruction manual or "template" in
attempting to piece together isolated disclosures and teachings
of the prior art so that the claimed invention is rendered
obvious.
Since we have determined that the teachings and suggestions
found collectively in Lake and Peschka would not have made the
subject matter as a whole of claims 1 through 8 on appeal obvious
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007