Appeal 2007-1361
Application 09/681,573
2. Obviousness Analysis
The question of obviousness is "based on underlying factual
determinations including . . . what th[e] prior art teaches explicitly and
inherently. . . ." In re Zurko, 258 F.3d 1379, 1383, 59 USPQ2d 1693, 1696
(Fed. Cir. 2001) (citing Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 17-18, 148
USPQ 459, 467 (1966); In re Dembiczak, 175 F.3d 994, 998, 50 USPQ2d
1614, 1616 (Fed. Cir. 1999); In re Napier, 55 F.3d 610, 613, 34 USPQ2d
1782, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1995)). "In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103,
the examiner bears the initial burden of presenting a prima facie case of
obviousness." In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1956
(Fed. Cir. 1993) (citing In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d
1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992)). "'A prima facie case of obviousness is
established when the teachings from the prior art itself would appear to have
suggested the claimed subject matter to a person of ordinary skill in the art.'"
In re Bell, 991 F.2d 781, 783, 26 USPQ2d 1529, 1531 (Fed. Cir. 1993)
(quoting In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1051, 189 USPQ 143, 147 (CCPA
1976)).
Here, regarding claim 1, the Appellants recognize, "ATS teaches
creating PDF files from an existing electronic document using Adobe
PDFWriter. . . ." (Br. 8) In the reference's own words, "PDFWriter . . .
allows you to 'print' your document to a PDF file similar to the way you
would print your document on a printer." (ATS, p. 3.) The Appellants also
recognize that "the Adobe PDFWriter of ATS . . . creates files of one format
- a PDF." (Br. 11.) Because the Adobe PDFWriter coverts documents into
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013