Ex parte SPECTOR - Page 3




          Appeal No. 1998-0235                                       Page 3           
          Application No. 08/709,764                                                  


          rejection, we make reference to the answer (Paper No. 11,                   
          mailed October 24, 1997) for the examiner's complete reasoning              
          in support of the rejection, and to the brief (Paper No. 10,                
          filed June 25, 1997) and reply brief (Paper No. 12, filed                   
          November 5, 1997) for the appellant's arguments thereagainst.               


                                       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 references, and to the                     
          respective positions articulated by the appellant and the                   
          examiner.  Upon evaluation of all the evidence before us, it                
          is our conclusion that the evidence adduced by the examiner is              
          insufficient to establish a prima facie case of obviousness                 
          with respect to the claims under appeal.  Accordingly, we will              
          not sustain the examiner's rejection of claims 1, 4, 5 and 8                
          under                                                                       
          35 U.S.C. § 103.  Our reasoning for this determination follows.             


               In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the examiner bears          
          the initial burden of presenting a prima facie case of obviousness.         







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007