Appeal No. 97-1657 Page 6
Application No. 08/216,735
(Fed. Cir. 1986); In re Sernaker, 702 F.2d 989, 991, 217 USPQ
1, 3 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
Obviousness of the claims
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 of the appealed claims.
Regarding claim 1, the examiner observes that Hogan
teaches “displaying an editing object,” “permitting said user
to alter a value,” and “automatically altering a display.”
(Final Rejection at 2.) This observation is not disputed by
the appellants. (Appeal Br. at 5.) The examiner recognizes
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007