Appeal No. 2006-1279
Application No. 10/249,005
Co., 383 U.S. 1, 17, 148 USPQ 459, 467 (1966). The examiner
must articulate reasons for the examiner’s decision. In re Lee,
277 F.3d 1338, 1342, 61 USPQ2d 1430, 1434 (Fed. Cir. 2002). In
particular, the examiner must show that there is a teaching,
motivation, or suggestion of a motivation to combine references
relied on as evidence of obviousness. Id. at 1343. The examiner
cannot simply reach conclusions based on the examiner’s own
understanding or experience - or on his or her assessment of what
would be basic knowledge or common sense. Rather, the examiner
must point to some concrete evidence in the record in support of
these findings. In re Zurko, 258 F.3d 1379, 1386, 59 USPQ2d
1693, 1697 (Fed. Cir. 2001). Thus the examiner must not only
assure that the requisite findings are made, based on evidence of
record, but must also explain the reasoning by which the findings
are deemed to support the examiner’s conclusion. However, 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
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007