Appeal No. 95-4113
Application No. 08/124,334
course, is impermissible. Since the examiner's rejection was3
based upon an erroneous obviousness determination, the examiner
has failed to meet the initial burden of presenting a prima facie
case of obviousness. Thus, we cannot sustain the examiner's4
rejection of appealed independent claims 1, 21, 22 and 23, or
claims 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 13 and 26 through 29 which depend
therefrom, under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims
1, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 13, 21, 22, 23 and 26 through 29 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
3 In re Fine, supra; In re Warner, supra.
4Note In re Rijckaert, supra; In re Lintner, supra; and In
re Fine, supra.
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007