Appeal No. 1996-3918
Application No. 08/232,351
§ 103. See In re Saari, 386 F.2d 909, 913, 155 USPQ 691, 694
(CCPA 1967). On this basis, we are satisfied that the
combined teachings of Cramblett and White establishes a prima
facie case of obviousness with respect to the claims under
consideration.
Having arrived at the conclusion that the evidence of
obviousness as applied in the rejection of the claims under
consideration is sufficient to establish a prima facie case of
obviousness, we recognize that the evidence of nonobviousness
submitted by the appellant must be considered en route to a
determination of obviousness/nonobviousness under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103. Stratoflex, Inc. v. Aeroquip Corp., 713 F.2d 1530,
1538, 218 USPQ 871, 879 (Fed. Cir. 1983). Accordingly, we
consider anew the issue of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103,
carefully evaluating therewith the objective evidence of
nonobviousness and argument supplied by the appellant. See In
re Piasecki, 745 F.2d 1468, 1472, 223 USPQ 785, 788 (Fed. Cir.
1984).
The declaration by Lee establishes that the declarant (1)
has a degree in architecture, (2) has read "the subject
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007