Appeal No. 2004-1307
Application No. 09/843,724
Grant discloses a keyboard having a top row of keys that
includes a Backspace key, a Left Parenthesis key and a Right
Parenthesis key, and extends to the right above a number pad
(figure 7).
The examiner argues that Grant’s top row of keys is a
cluster, and that if the cluster were added to Olsson’s keyboard
it would extend directly behind Olsson’s first key cluster and be
spaced within one inch therefrom (answer, pages 10-14). The
motivation for making that combination, the examiner argues,
would be “to allow the convenience to the user as a typing aids”
(answer, page 4).
For a prima facie case of obviousness to be established, the
teachings from the prior art itself must appear to have suggested
the claimed subject matter to one of ordinary skill in the art.
See In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1051, 189 USPQ 143, 147 (CCPA
1976). The mere fact that the prior art could be modified as
proposed by the examiner is not sufficient to establish a prima
facie case of obviousness. See In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260,
1266, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1783 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
The examiner has not established that Olsson and Grant
themselves would have indicated to one of ordinary skill in the
art that adding Grant’s top row of keys to Olsson’s keyboard
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007