Ex Parte Sato - Page 10

                Appeal 2007-1275                                                                              
                Application 09/824,248                                                                        

                'functional approach' of Hotchkiss, 11 How. 248 [(1850)]."  KSR, 127 S. Ct.                   
                at 1739, 82 USPQ2d at 1395 (citing Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1,                      
                12, 148 USPQ 459, 464 (1966) (emphasis added)), and reaffirmed principles                     
                based on its precedent that "[t]he combination of familiar elements                           
                according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does no more                       
                than yield predictable results."  Id.  The Court explained:                                   
                             When a work is available in one field of endeavor,                               
                             design incentives and other market forces can                                    
                             prompt variations of it, either in the same field or a                           
                             different one.  If a person of ordinary skill can                                
                             implement a predictable variation, §103 likely bars                              
                             its patentability.  For the same reason, if a                                    
                             technique has been used to improve one device,                                   
                             and a person of ordinary skill in the art would                                  
                             recognize that it would improve similar devices in                               
                             the same way, using the technique is obvious                                     
                             unless its actual application is beyond his or her                               
                             skill.                                                                           

                Id. at 1740, 82 USPQ2d at 1396.  The operative question in this "functional                   
                approach" is thus "whether the improvement is more than the predictable use                   
                of prior art elements according to their established functions."  Id. at 1740,                
                82 USPQ2d at 1396.                                                                            
                      The Court noted that "[t]o facilitate review, this [obviousness]                        
                analysis should be made explicit."  Id. at 1741, 82 USPQ2d at 1396 (citing                    
                In re Kahn, 441 F.3d 977, 988, 78 USPQ2d 1329, 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2006)                          
                ("[R]ejections on obviousness grounds cannot be sustained by mere                             
                conclusory statements; instead, there must be some articulated reasoning                      
                with some rational underpinning to support the legal conclusion of                            

                                                     10                                                       

Page:  Previous  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013