Mouttet cited in Ex parte Albert
“If a person of ordinary skill, before the time of invention and without
knowledge of that invention, would have found the invention merely an easily
predictable and achievable variation or combination of the prior art, then the
invention likely would have been obvious.” Rolls-Royce, PLC v. United Techs.
Corp., 603 F.3d 1325, 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2010). Cf. In re Mouttet, 686 F.3d 1322,
1332 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (“It is well-established that a determination of obviousness
based on teachings from multiple references does not require an actual, physical
substitution of elements.”) (citations omitted) .
Common sense is mentioned
See Perfect Web Technologies, Inc. v. InfoUSA, Inc., 587 F.3d 1324,
1329 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (“hold[ing] that while an analysis of obviousness always
depends on evidence that supports the required Graham factual findings, it also
may include recourse to logic, judgment, and common sense available to the
person of ordinary skill that do not necessarily require explication in any reference
or expert opinion.”)