Ex parte AMURO et al. - Page 4




          Appeal No. 97-2979                                         Page 4           
          Application No. 08/219,553                                                  


          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 1-3.  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.  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 the rejection by observing that                    
          Fischer describes a system comprising host processors, a                    







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007