Appeal No. 2006-1554 Page 12
Application No. 10/369,819
the claimed invention, or to the knowledge of one of
ordinary skill in the art.”
In re Johnston, 435 F.3d 1381, 1385, 77 USPQ2d 1788, 1790-91 (Fed. Cir. 2006)
(citing Medical Instrumentation and Diagnostics Corp. v. Elekta AB, 344 F.3d
1205, 1221-22 (Fed. Cir. 2003)). “’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.’” Kahn, 441 F.3d at 987-88, 78 USPQ2d at 1336 (quoting In re
Kotzab, 217 F.3d 1365, 1370, 55 USPQ2d 1313, 1317 (Fed. Cir. 2000)).
We find that a person of ordinary skill in the art, possessed with the
understandings and knowledge reflected in the prior art, and motivated by the
general problem facing the inventor, would have been led to make the combination
recited in the claims. In particular, a person having ordinary skill in the art,
possessed with the knowledge of using a push button to release and replace a side
panel member of a casing of a computer, and possessed with the knowledge of
locating push buttons on the normally hidden bottom surface portion of a computer
to prevent inadvertent actuation, would have been led to locate the push button of
Hrehor on the normally hidden bottom surface portion to solve the problem facing
the inventor of developing a computer with removable panels that may be removed
and replaced easily without lending themselves to inadvertent or mischievous
removal. This configuration would naturally require one to position the computer
with the normally hidden bottom surface portion exposed so as to push the
pushbutton to remove and replace the side panel. As such, we reject claim 1 as
obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based on the prior art teaching of Hrehor and the
common knowledge in the art of locating push buttons on the bottom surface
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007