Appeal No. 97-4062 Page 4
Application No. 08/590,049
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 arguments of
the appellants and examiner. After considering the entire
record before us, we are persuaded that the examiner erred in
rejecting claims 1-33. Accordingly, we reverse.
We begin our consideration of the obviousness of the
claims by noting that in rejecting claims under § 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 of ordinary skill in the art." In re Bell,
991 F.2d 781, 782, 26 USPQ2d 1529, 1531 (Fed. Cir. 1993)
(quoting In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1051, 189 USPQ 143,
147 (CCPA 1976)). If the examiner fails to establish a prima
facie case, an obviousness rejection will be reversed. In re
Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir.
1993)(citing In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 1074, 5 USPQ2d 1596,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007