Appeal No. 2005-2284
Application No. 09/748,589
Claims 126-141 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103. As
evidence of obviousness the examiner offers either one of Zhang or
Johnson, in view of Leedy, with regard to claims 126-135 and 138-
141, adding to these combinations Hayashi, with regard to claim
136, and Anderson with regard to claim 137.
Reference is made to the brief and answer for the respective
positions of appellants and the examiner.
OPINION
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the examiner bears
the initial burden of presenting a prima facie case of obviousness.
See In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1956 (Fed.
Cir. 1993). To reach a conclusion of obviousness under § 103, the
examiner must produce a factual basis supported by a teaching in a
prior art reference or shown to be common knowledge of
unquestionable demonstration. Our reviewing court requires this
evidence in order to establish a prima facie case. In re Piasecki,
745 F.2d 1468, 1471-72, 223 USPQ 785, 787-88 (Fed. Cir. 1984). The
examiner may satisfy his/her burden only by showing some objective
teaching in the prior art or that knowledge generally available to
one of ordinary skill in the art would lead the individual to
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007