Appeal No. 1997-0197
Application No. 08/195,676
of obviousness relied upon by the Examiner as support for the
rejection. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into
consideration, in reaching our decision, Appellants’
arguments set forth in the Briefs along with the Examiner's
rationale in support of the rejection and arguments in
rebuttal
set forth in the Examiner's Answer. It is our view, after
consideration of the record before us, that the collective
evidence relied upon and the level of skill in the particular
art would not have suggested to one of ordinary skill in the
art the obviousness of the invention as set forth in claims 1,
3-7, and 9-12. Accordingly, we reverse.
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, it is
incumbent upon the Examiner to establish a factual basis to
support the legal conclusion of obviousness. See In re Fine,
837
F.2d 1071, 1073, 5 USPQ2d 1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir. 1988). In so
doing, the Examiner is expected to make the factual
determinations set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S.
1,
17, 148 USPQ 459, 467 (1966), and to provide a reason why one
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007