View source for Homework due 1/28/11

Using your patent from the homework due on Monday, obtain some (2 or 3 if they are of normal length) of the References Cited, preferably other patents. Using those references, would the patent you chose be patentable under the analysis of Hotchkiss or A&P? Would it satisfy the nonobviousness requirement of 35 USC 103 under Lyon? If the answer is different, which I suspect would be the normal case, what evolution of the standards of nonobviousness (referred to in the old cases as inventivness or something similar) lead to the change? As a rule of thumb, I would say the analysis for each case would take about page, with perhaps a common page or two description of what the references disclose.

==Patents Cited==
*Patent 4480831: Exercise hoop having a counter [http://www.google.com/patents?id=wpg9AAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4&source=gbs_overview_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false]
**Date issued: Nov 6, 1984
*Patent 4723775: Hooped amusement device [http://www.google.com/patents?id=jAY4AAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q&f=false]
**Date issued: Feb 9, 1988

==Background==
==Analysis==
==The Evolution of Nonobviousness==