Appeal No. 97-1761 Page 11
Application No. 08/380,223
compressor with a spring as shown by Zimmer. Thus, we agree
with the appellants' argument (brief, p. 13) that the combined
teachings of Zimmer and the admitted prior art would not have
suggested the claimed invention. That is, the examiner did
not establish a prima facie case of obviousness. In any
event, for the reasons set forth previously, we are persuaded
that the evidence contained in Pruitt's declaration was
sufficient to overcome a prima facie case of obviousness.
For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the
examiner to reject claims 16, 20 through 22 and 25 under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Zimmer in view of the
admitted prior art is reversed.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject
claims 16 through 25 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007