Appeal No. 97-1263 Page 5
Application No. 08/219,552
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we considered
the subject matter on appeal and the rejection and evidence
advanced by the examiner. We also considered the appellants’
and examiner’s arguments. After considering the record before
us, it is our view that the evidence and level of skill in the
art would not have suggested to one of ordinary skill in the
art the invention of claims 1-10. Accordingly, we reverse.
We begin our consideration of the obviousness 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 is established when the teachings from the prior art
itself would appear to have suggested the claimed subject
matter to a person of ordinary skill in the art. In re
Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir.
1993).
If the burden of establishing a prima facie case is met,
the burden of coming forward with evidence or argument shifts
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007