Appeal No. 96-3604 Page 5
Application No. 08/383,658
the art would not have suggested to one of ordinary skill in
the art the invention of claims 5 and 13. Accordingly, we
reverse.
We begin our consideration of the nonobviousness of the
claims by recalling that in rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. §
103, the patent examiner bears the initial burden of
establishing a prima facie case of obviousness. A prima facie
case of obviousness is established when the teachings from the
prior art itself would appear to have suggested the claimed
subject matter to a person having ordinary skill in the art.
If the examiner
fails to establish a prima facie case, an obviousness
rejection is improper and will be overturned. In re
Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir.
1993). With this in mind, we analyze the examiner’s
rejection.
The examiner begins his rejection by characterizing
Admission as follows.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007