Appeal No. 95-3194 Application 08/020,232 OPINION 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, the 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. It is our view, after consideration of the record before us, that the collective evidence relied upon and the level of skill in the particular art would have suggested to one of ordinary skill in the art the obviousness of the invention as set forth in claims 1, 3-6 and 9-17. We reach the opposite conclusion with respect to claims 7 and 8. Accordingly, we affirm-in-part. As a general proposition in an appeal involving a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103, an examiner is under a burden to make out a prima facie case of obviousness. If that burden is met, the burden of going forward then shifts to the applicant to overcome the prima facie case with argument and/or evidence. Obviousness is then determined on the basis of the evidence as a 4Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007