Ex Parte Burnett et al - Page 4



          Appeal No. 2006-0456                                        Page 4          
          Application No. 10/410,778                                                  

                                       OPINION                                        
               In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have carefully             
          considered the subject matter on appeal, the rejections advanced            
          by the examiner, and the evidence of obviousness relied upon by             
          the examiner as support for the rejections.  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.                             
               Upon consideration of the record before us, we make the                
          determinations which follow.  We begin with the rejection of                
          claims 1-13 and 22-24 as being unpatentable over Young in view of           
          Kuo and Baruch.  We begin with independent claims 1 and 22.                 
               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, 148 USPQ 459, 467              









Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007