Appeal No. 96-1286
Application 08/259,360
of the teachings or suggestions of the inventor. Para-
Ordnance Mfg. Inc. v. SGS Importers Int’l Inc., 73 F.3d 1085,
1087, 37 USPQ2d 1237, 1239 (Fed. Cir. 1995), cert. denied, 117
S. Ct. 80 (1996).
The initial burden is on the examiner to establish a
prima facie basis to reject the claims. In re Oetiker, 977
F.2d 1443,
1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992); In re Piasecki,
745 F.2d 1468, 1472, 223 USPQ 785, 788 (Fed. Cir. 1984). The
examiner must provide an adequate factual basis to support an
obviousness conclusion. In re Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 1016,
154 USPQ 173, 178 (CCPA 1967). Here, the examiner’s findings
are too vague and incomplete for supporting a case of prima
facie obviousness. The necessary burden has not been met.
For the foregoing reasons, we do not sustain the
rejection of claims 1-13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over the appellants’ own admitted prior art, in
view of either Nissen or Fuss.
Conclusion
The rejection of claims 1-13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over the appellant’s admitted prior art and
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007