Appeal No. 96-0892
Application No. 08/264,870
examiner has not made out a prima facie case of obviousness
for appellants' claimed invention.
Appellants devote the second section of their Brief to
the argument that the comparative data found in their
specification is evidence of nonobviousness, i.e., unexpected
results. On the other hand, we have reviewed the Examiner's
Answer in vain for any response to appellants' argument or
analysis of the specification data. This lack of response by
the examiner, in and of itself, warrants a summary reversal of
the examiner's rejection. In any event, since we find that
the examiner has not established a prima facie case of
obviousness, we decline to address the probative value of
appellants' specification data.
As a final point, we note that the examiner has limited
the search of the claimed invention to Class 524. Perhaps,
the examiner would find that a search of the textile arts
would be fruitful.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing, the examiner's
decision rejecting the appealed claims is reversed.
REVERSED
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007