Ex parte DARLAND et al. - Page 4




             Appeal No. 1999-0154                                                                                 
             Application 08/553,201                                                                               


             appeal, the rejection advanced by the Examiner and the                                               
             evidence of obviousness relied upon by the Examiner as support                                       
             for the rejection.  We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into                                       
             consideration, in reaching our decision, Appellants’ arguments                                       
             set forth in the Briefs along with the Examiner’s rationale in                                       
             support of the rejections and arguments in rebuttal set forth                                        
             in the Examiner’s Answer.                                                                            
                    It is our view, after consideration of the record before                                      
             us, that the evidence relied upon and the level of skill in                                          
             the particular art would not have suggested to one of ordinary                                       
             skill in the art the invention set forth in claims 1-12.                                             
             Accordingly, we reverse.                                                                             
                    In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, it is                                              
             incumbent upon the Examiner to establish a factual basis to                                          
             support the legal conclusion of obviousness.  See In re Fine,                                        
             837                                                                                                  
             F.2d 1071, 1073, 5 USPQ2d 1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir. 1988).  In so                                        
             doing, the Examiner is expected to make the factual                                                  
             determinations set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S.                                       
             1,                                                                                                   
             17-18, 148 USPQ 459, 467 (1966), and to provide a reason why                                         
                                                      -4-4                                                        





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007