Appeal No. 2006-2460 Page 9
Application No. 09/966,620
applied, namely, disabling listening for configuration packets after
configuration [answer, page 5; see also Ylonen, col. 8, lines 66 and 67,
cont’d col. 9, lines 1-9]. Significantly, we note that there is no explicit or
implicit deficiency found within Philippou’s disclosure that would suggest to
an artisan that a more reliable manner of loading configuration data was
required. Indeed, we note that Philippou is silent with respect to any
mention of configuration reliability problems. Therefore, we do not see how
an artisan having knowledge of Philippou would have been reasonably
motivated to look to Ylonen to disable listening for configuration packets
after configuration to achieve the purpose of loading configuration data in a
reliable manner. We note that our reviewing court has clearly stated:
“[d]etermination of obviousness cannot be based on the hindsight
combination of components selectively culled from the prior art to fit the
parameters of the patented invention. There must be a teaching or
suggestion within the prior art, or within the general knowledge of a person
of ordinary skill in the field of the invention, to look to particular sources of
information, to select particular elements, and to combine them in the way
they were combined by the inventor.” ATD Corp. v. Lydall, Inc., 159 F.3d
534, 546, 48 USPQ2d 1321, 1329 (Fed. Cir. 1998).
In the instant case, we find that the examiner has impermissibly used
the claimed invention as a template or guide in order to piece together the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007