Appeal No. 96-0298
Application 07/920,230
because, on this record, there is a lack of motivation to combine the references. In re Rouffet, 149
F.3d 1350, 1358, 47 USPQ2d 1453, 1458 (Fed. Cir. 1998). For the foregoing reasons, the
examiner’s rejection of claims 1-32 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over the combined teachings of EPA,
Frederick (A), Frederick (B) and Young is reversed. We also reverse the rejection of claims 9-18
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over the combined teaches of EPA, Frederick (A), Frederick (B),Young and
Hawley because Hawley does not make up for the deficiencies of the other references.
Conclusion
We conclude that the examiner has not established a prima facie case of obviousness for
either rejection and selected the references with the assistance of hindsight. Accordingly, the rejection
of claims 1-32 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over EPA, Frederick (A), Frederick (B) and Young and the
rejection of claims 9-18 over are EPA, Frederick (A), Frederick (B),Young and Hawley are reversed.
REVERSED
CAMERON WEIFFENBACH )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
CHUNG K. PAK )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
)
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007