Appeal No. 2004-0532
Application No. 09/150,277
for aligning garment segment patterns in a fabric sheet having
designs such as stripes and plaids. In re Dembiczak, 175 F.3d
994, 999, 50 USPQ2d 1614, 1617 (Fed. Cir. 1999)(“T]he best
defense against the subtle but powerful attraction of a
hindsight-based obviousness analysis is rigorous application of
the requirement for a showing of the teaching or motivation to
combine prior art references.”); In re Rouffet, 149 F.3d 1350,
1359, 47 USPQ2d 1453, 1459 (Fed. Cir. 1998)(“T]he Board must
explain the reasons one of ordinary skill in the art would have
been motivated to select the references and to combine them to
render the claimed invention obvious.”); In re Warner, 397 F.2d
1011, 1016, 154 USPQ 173, 177 (CCPA 1967)(“W]here the invention
sought to be patented resides in a combination of old elements,
the proper inquiry is whether bringing them together was obvious
and not, whether one of ordinary skill, having the invention
before him, would find it obvious through hindsight to construct
the invention from elements of the prior art.”).
For this reason, we cannot uphold this ground of rejection.
As to the separate rejection of appealed claims 2, 3, 6, 9,
13 through 17, and 23, the examiner relies on Gane for reasons
unrelated to the basic deficiency in the combination of Chaiken
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007