Appeal No. 97-0071
Application No. 08/263,033
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellant and the
examiner. Upon evaluation of all the evidence before us, it is
our conclusion that the evidence adduced by the examiner is
insufficient to establish a prima facie case of obviousness with
respect to claims 1 through 3, 5 through 11, 13 through 15 and 18
through 21. Accordingly, we will not sustain the examiner's
rejection of claims 1 through 3, 5 through 11, 13 through 15 and
18 through 21 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Our reasoning for this
determination follows.
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). A prima facie case of obviousness
is established by presenting evidence that the reference
teachings would appear to be sufficient for one of ordinary skill
in the relevant art having the references before him to make the
proposed combination or other modification. See In re Lintner, 9
F.2d 1013, 1016, 173 USPQ 560, 562 (CCPA 1972). Furthermore, the
conclusion that the claimed subject matter is prima facie
obvious must be supported by evidence, as shown by some objective
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007