Appeal 2007-1568
Application 09/900,375
6. The timepiece in turn includes a dial face (3) that displays objects (11,
12, and 13), typical of the current season, that are associated with a treetop
(10), (Col. 5, ll. 15-19).
7. The objects are displayed on the dial face of the clock (2) to represent
the specific season according to the changes with time of the treetop (10)
during the course of the year. (Col. 5, ll. 8-10).
8. Hepps’ display device further includes a figurative character (15) that
reminds users of the jobs to be done depending on the time and location.
(Col. 5, ll. 24-30).
PRINCIPLES OF LAW
1. OBVIOUSNESS (Prima Facie)
The Supreme Court in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 17-18,
148 USPQ 459, 467 (1966), stated that three factual inquiries underpin any
determination of obviousness:
Under § 103, [1] the scope and content of the prior art are to be
determined; [2] differences between the prior art and the claims
at issue are to be ascertained; and [3] the level of ordinary skill
in the pertinent art resolved. Against this background, the
obviousness or nonobviousness of the subject matter is
determined. Such secondary considerations as commercial
success, long felt but unsolved needs, failure of others, etc.,
might be utilized to give light to the circumstances surrounding
the origin of the subject matter sought to be patented. As
indicia of obviousness or nonobviousness, these inquiries may
have relevancy.
Where the claimed subject matter involves more than the simple
substitution one known element for another or the mere application of a
known technique to a piece of prior art ready for the improvement, a holding
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013