Appeal No. 2005-2753
Application No. 09/730,238
A suggestion, teaching, or motivation to combine the relevant prior art teachings does
not have to be found explicitly in the prior art, as the teaching, motivation, or suggestion may
be implicit from the prior art as a whole, rather than expressly stated in the references. The
test for an implicit showing is what the combined teachings, knowledge of one of ordinary
skill in the art, and the nature of the problem to be solved as a whole would have suggested
to those of ordinary skill in the art. In re Kahn, citing Kotzab at 217 F.3d 1365, 1370.
For the reasons set forth in our opinion, it is our view that the combinations of
references applied by the examiner would clearly have suggested the instant claimed subject
matter even if not explicitly set forth in the references. The nature of the problem to be
solved by the instant invention, i.e., a power supply coupled directly to the bus hub to supply
power to that bus hub, and the teachings of Herwig in providing a power supply external to
the bus hub and Flannery in providing for an internal bus hub power supply, would clearly
have suggested to the artisan a power supply being coupled to the bus hub to supply power to
the bus hub, as claimed.
We have carefully considered appellant’s request for rehearing. We grant the request
to the extent that we have expanded the panel hearing this case and we have reconsidered our
decision. However, the request is denied with regard to making any changes in our decision
of November 22, 2005.
-20-
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007