Appeal No. 98-1183 Page 5
Application No. 08/352,513
sufficient to establish obviousness with respect to claim 8
but not with respect to claims 1 and 13. Accordingly, we will
sustain the examiner's rejection of claim 8, and claims 10
through 12 which fall with claim 8, under 35 U.S.C. § 103. We
will not sustain the examiner's rejection of claims 1 through
7, 9 and 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Our reasoning for this
determination follows.
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the examiner
bears the initial burden of presenting a case of obviousness.
See In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1956
(Fed. Cir. 1993). Obviousness is established by presenting
evidence that the reference teachings would appear to be
sufficient for one of ordinary skill in the relevant art
having the references before him to make the proposed
combination or other modification. See In re Lintner, 9 F.2d
1013, 1016, 173 USPQ 560, 562 (CCPA 1972). Furthermore, the
conclusion that the claimed subject matter is obvious must be
supported by evidence, as shown by some objective teaching in
the prior art or by knowledge generally available to one of
ordinary skill in the art that would have led that individual
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007