Appeal No. 2006-2084
Reexamination Control No. 90/006,360
Cir. 1995) (the Board did not err in adopting the approach that the level of skill in
the art was best determined by the references of record); Okajima v. Bourdeau,
261 F.3d 1350, 1355, 59 USPQ2d 1795, 1797 (Fed. Cir. 2001) ("[T]he absence of
specific findings on the level of skill in the art does not give rise to reversible error
'where the prior art itself reflects an appropriate level and a need for testimony is
not shown.'"). In addition, the level of ordinary skill is evidenced by statements in
the '400 patent. For example, the '400 patent discloses that those of ordinary skill
in the art knew there was a need for small-shank tools (col. 3, lines 40-44):
"'[S]mall-shank' screw machines . . . can only accommodate shanks having widths
of less than 9 mm. Currently, the industry standard shank widths for such
'small-shank' machines are 7 mm and 8 mm." The '400 patent also states: "In the
embodiment of the present invention illustrated, the angle B is approximately 35°;
however, as will be recognized by those skilled in the pertinent art, this angle may
be changed as desired depending upon the requirements of a particular cutting tool
design or other machining system." ('400 patent, col. 4, lines 28-33.) Those
skilled in the small-shank machine tool art were also familiar with the prior art in
- 42 -
Page: Previous 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007