Appeal No. 2000-0487 Page 4
Application No. 08/856,228
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellant's specification and
claims, to the applied prior art, and to the respective
positions articulated by the appellant and the examiner. As a
consequence of our review, we make the determinations which
follow.
Claims 7 to 9, 11, 12 and 20
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 7 to 9, 11,
12 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the examiner
bears the initial burden of presenting a prima facie case of
obviousness. See In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28
USPQ2d 1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir. 1993). A prima facie case of
obviousness is established by presenting evidence that the
reference teachings would appear to be sufficient for one of
ordinary skill in the relevant art having the references
before him to make the proposed combination or other
modification. See In re Lintner, 458 F.2d 1013, 1016, 173
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007