Appeal No. 2006-2154 Page 6
Application No. 10/786,998
‘004 teaches the use of engineering ceramics for the valve seat and movable shut-
off element of a control valve and further teaches that the same materials can be
used in ball valves and disc slide valves, Berchem ‘004 does not explicitly teach
using either silicon or quartz glass for the components of a disc slide valve.
With regard to the level of skill in the art, we find that a person of ordinary
skill in the art would be presumed to know the relevant teachings of Berchem ‘427
and Berchem ‘004. Custom Accessories, Inc. v. Jeffrey-Allan Indus., Inc., 807 F.2d
955, 962, 1 USPQ2d 1196, 1201 (Fed. Cir. 1986) (The person of ordinary skill in
the art is a hypothetical person who is presumed to know the relevant prior art).
As such, a person of ordinary skill in the art would be presumed to know that
engineering ceramics could be used for the valve seat and movable shut-off
element of a ball valve or disc slide valve to reduce wear encountered by abrasive
materials flowing through a flow passage (Berchem ‘004, col. 1, lines 41-49 and
Berchem ‘427, col. 1, lines 58-66). A person of ordinary skill in the art would also
be presumed to know that silicon dioxide, also known as quartz glass, is one of the
engineering ceramic materials that could be used in a control valve (Berchem ‘427,
col. 2, lines 5-6).
As part of our review of the Graham factors, we also considered whether
there was a “teaching, suggestion, or motivation” to modify or combine the prior
art teachings of Berchem ‘427 and Berchem ‘004. As recently described in In re
Kahn, 441 F.3d 977, 78 USPQ2d 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2006):
[T]he “motivation-suggestion-teaching” test asks not
merely what the references disclose, but whether 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
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007