Appeal No. 95-3898
Application 08/156,953
The examiner’s above-noted portion of the answer takes as
its starting points the teachings and suggestions in Hoekje.
However, a detailed, considered study of the examiner’s
position leads us to conclude that just as well Lichtenberg
may have been properly used as a starting point from which to
analyze the collective teachings and suggestions from an
artisan’s perspective, as the examiner has done, to arrive at
the conclusion of the obviousness of the present subject
matter on appeal. The examiner’s reasoning clearly sets forth
a prima facie case of obviousness of the desirability and/or
motivation to have combined the collective teachings and
suggestions of the references from an artisan’s perspective,
contrary to the assertions made by appellants in the brief as
to the Hoekje-Lichtenberg combination. The examiner’s
position even considers the merits and opinions of declarant
Donald Murphy in the examiner’s analysis. Significantly,
there is no reply brief to rebut the examiner’s reasoning and
positions set forth in this portion of the answer.
To embellish upon the examiner’s reasoning of
combinability, the entire first paragraph of Lichtenberg
indicates that the art as well as the authors of Lichtenberg’s
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007