Appeal No. 98-1050
Application No. 08/558,163
unpatentable over Umemoto in view of Kubis, Simonyi and
Greene.
The rejections are explained in Paper No. 7 (the final
rejection).
OPINION
In reaching our decision on the issues raised in this
appeal, we have carefully assessed the claims, the prior art
applied against the claims, and the respective views of the
examiner and the appellant as set forth in the Answer and the
Brief. As a result of our review, we have determined that
both rejections should be sustained. Our reasoning in support
of this conclusion follows.
We begin our analysis by noting on the record the
guidance provided by our reviewing court on the issue of
obviousness. A prima facie case of obviousness is established
when the teachings of the prior art itself would appear to
have suggested the claimed subject matter to one of ordinary
skill in the art (see In re Bell, 991 F.2d 781, 783, 26 USPQ2d
1529, 1531 (Fed. Cir. 1993)). This is not to say, however,
that the claimed invention must expressly be suggested in any
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007