Appeal No. 95-1668
Application 07/948,089
apparent to us, why Somerville’s statement that the high heating
value material is otherwise unusable would have provided one of
ordinary skill in the art with motivation to use sewage sludge
from a secondary treatment system of a sewage processing plant
as or in addition to the high heating value material.
For the above reasons, we conclude that the examiner has
not carried his burden of establishing a prima facie case of
obviousness of appellants’ claimed invention. See In re
Piasecki, 745 F.2d 1468, 1472, 223 USPQ 785, 788 (Fed. Cir.
1984); In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1051, 189 USPQ 143, 147
(CCPA 1976).
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007