Appeal No. 2003-1220
Application No. 09/830,420
the level of ordinary skill in the art, the nature of the problem
to be solved, or any other factual findings that would support a
proper obviousness analysis. See, e.g., Pro-Mold & Tool Co. v.
Great Lakes Plastics, Inc., 75 F.3d 1568, 1573, 37 USPQ2d 1626,
1630 (Fed. Cir. 1996).
In conclusion, since the Examiner has not shown how all of
the limitations of the appealed claims are taught or suggested by
the applied prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness has not
been established. We make the observation that our holding in
this case does not mean that a prima facie case of obviousness
could not have been made based on the present applied prior art,
but only that the Examiner has not made such a prima facie case
based on the record before us in this appeal.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007