Appeal 2006-2987
Application 10/661,651
has low tooling costs and does not result in burrs (Walker, pp. 512-13, list of
advantages).
To support a prima facie case of obviousness, an examiner must show,
by a preponderance of the evidence, that a person of ordinary skill in the art,
possessed with the understanding 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 re Kahn, 441 F.3d 977,
988, 78 USPQ2d 1329, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2006). 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
the references. In re Kahn, 441 F.3d at 987-88, 78 USPQ2d at 1336.
We begin the analysis by considering the prior art from the viewpoint
of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Kotzab, 217 F.3d 1365, 1369,
55 USPQ2d 1313, 1316 (Fed.Cir.2000) (“A critical step in analyzing the
patentability of claims pursuant to section 103(a) is casting the mind back to
the time of invention, to consider the thinking of one of ordinary skill in the
art, guided only by the prior art references and the then-accepted wisdom in
the field.”).
A preponderance of the evidence supports the Examiner’s finding of a
reason, suggestion, or motivation from within the art for using chemical
milling to accomplish rotational balancing of blisks. Lowe recognizes that
to balance a blisk, individual airfoil blades may require additional milling
(Lowe, col. 2, ll. 61-62). Chemical milling, according to Walker, was a
known alternative to the more traditional mechanical milling technique
(Walker, p. 511, col. 1). Chemical milling like mechanical milling serves to
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013