Court Opinion

ID: 9472487
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 04:01:49.259112+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:42:57.865610
License: Public Domain

JACK R. MILLER, Circuit Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I dissent with respect to claim 4, the obviousness of which is not supported by Shepard in view of Orita. Indeed, stopping Shepard’s question tape drive in accordance with Orita would stop the answer recording tape, and, without a recorded answer, the next question would not be asked. The “bodily incorporation” point made by the majority opinion is not responsive to appellant’s position that the operation of the devices of Orita and Shepard is so different that one of ordinary skill in the art would not view this as a natural and logical combination. In re Walker, 374 F.2d 908, 913, 153 USPQ 180, 185, 54 CCPA 1235, 1240 (1967).