Appeal No. 2005-2412
Application No. 10/018,818
to conform with the snack piece shape. We do not perceive and
the examiner does not explain why Griffith’s column 2 disclosure
of an insertable cushioning member 18 would have suggested such a
modification. With respect to this rejection, it is only the
appellants’ own disclosure which contains any teaching of
modifying a container bottom in the manner proposed by the
examiner. These circumstances reflect that the examiner’s
proposed combination of Baur and Griffith is the result of
impermissible hindsight derived from the appellants’ own
disclosure rather than any teaching or suggestion derived from
these applied references. See W.L. Gore & Assocs. v. Garlock,
Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1553, 220 USPQ 303, 312-13 (Fed. Cir. 1983),
cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007