Appeal No. 2006-1228
Application No. 09/802,982
The examiner argues that because Whalen and Momose (and
presumably Patry which, like Whalen, discloses a building air-
conditioning system) are in the examiner’s search class, the fact
that they pertain to different systems is irrelevant (answer,
pages 16-17). The mere fact that references are in the same
search class does not mean one of ordinary skill in the art would
have combined their teachings. There must be some teaching from
the prior art itself which would have suggested the combination.
See In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1051, 189 USPQ 143, 147 (CCPA
1976). The examiner has not provided evidence that the applied
references themselves would have fairly suggested, to one of
ordinary skill in the art, combining the relied upon teachings
pertaining to building heating and cooling systems and an air
conditioner calorimeter with the vehicle passenger compartment
systems of Noda and Enomoto.
The examiner argues that the structures in Noda’s figures 3
and 4 are modules (answer, page 16). What the appellant’s
claim 12 requires is a modular casing containing the recited
components, and the examiner has not explained how the applied
references would have fairly suggested such a modular casing to
one of ordinary skill in the art.
11
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007