Appeal No. 97-0990 Page 5
Application No. 08/105,093
No. 15, filed August 27, 1996) for the appellants' arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellants' specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants 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 the appealed claims. Accordingly, we will not sustain
the examiner's rejection of claims 1 through 7 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103. Our reasoning for this determination follows.
The test for obviousness is what the combined teachings of
the references would have suggested to one of ordinary skill in
the art. See In re Young, 927 F.2d 588, 591, 18 USPQ2d 1089,
1091 (Fed. Cir. 1991) and In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425, 208
USPQ 871, 881 (CCPA 1981). 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
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007