Ex parte NORDIN - Page 13




          Appeal No. 1996-3960                                                        
          Application No. 08/380,444                                                  


               The Supreme Court in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383                     
               U.S. 1 (1966), focused on the procedural and                           
               evidentiary processes in reaching a conclusion under                   
               Section 103.  As adapted to ex parte procedure,                        
               Graham is interpreted as continuing to place the                       
               "burden of proof on the Patent Office which requires                   
               it to produce the factual basis for its rejection of                   
               an application under section 102 and 103."  Citing                     
               In re Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 1020, 154 USPQ 173, 177                   
               (CCPA 1967).                                                           
               For the foregoing reasons we will not affirm the                       
          rejection of claims 1 through 4 and 8 under 35 U.S.C. § 102,                
          nor will we affirm the rejection of claims 1 through 4 and 7                
          through 11 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.                                           
               No period for taking any subsquent action in connection                
          with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR § 1.136(a).                   


                                   REVERSED                                           




                         KENNETH W. HAIRSTON           )                              
                         Administrative Patent Judge   )                              
                                                       )                              
                                                       )                              
                                                       )                              
                                                       ) BOARD OF PATENT              
                         MICHAEL R. FLEMING            )     APPEALS                  
                         Administrative Patent Judge   )       AND                    
                                                       )  INTERFERENCES               
                                                       )                              
                                         13                                           





Page:  Previous  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007