Appeal No. 97-3402
Application No. 08/513,705
The rejection is explained in Paper No. 6 (the final
rejection), and in the Examiner's Answer.
The opposing viewpoints of the appellant are set forth in
the Brief.
OPINION
After consideration of the positions and arguments set
forth by both the examiner and the appellant, we have
concluded that the teachings of the reference relied upon fail
to establish a prima facie case of obviousness with respect to
the claimed subject matter. This being the case, we will not
sustain the rejection. Our reasons for this decision follow.
The claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103, and
therefore the examiner bears the initial burden of presenting
a prima facie case of obviousness (see In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d
1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir. 1993)), which is
established when the teachings of the prior art itself would
appear to have suggested the claimed subject matter to one of
ordinary skill in the art (see In re Bell, 991 F.2d 781, 783,
26 USPQ2d 1529, 1531 (Fed. Cir. 1993)).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007