Appeal No. 1999-0721
Application No. 08/683,826
the examiner has the initial duty of supplying the factual
basis for the rejection he advances. He may not, because he
doubts that the invention is patentable, resort to
speculation, unfounded assumptions or hindsight reconstruction
to supply deficiencies in the factual basis. See In re
Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 1017, 154 USPQ 173, 178 (CCPA 1967).
cert. denied, 389 U.S. 1057 (1968).
As should be apparent from the foregoing, we have refused
to sustain either of the rejections before us on appeal. Thus
the decision of the examiner rejecting claims 5 through 8 of
the present application under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is reversed.
REVERSED
NEAL E. ABRAMS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
CHARLES E. FRANKFORT ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
JOHN P. McQUADE )
Administrative Patent Judge )
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007