Appeal No. 98-1922 Page 9
Application No. 08/253,721
conclusion that the claimed subject matter is prima facie
obvious must be supported by evidence, as shown by some
objective teaching in the prior art or by knowledge generally
available to one of ordinary skill in the art that would have
led that individual to combine the relevant teachings of the
references to arrive at the claimed invention. See In re
Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 1074, 5 USPQ2d 1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir.
1988).
Claim 2
Claim 2 reads as follows:
The slide according to Claim 16 which further
comprises said ends being substantially arcuate in
configuration from side wall to side wall.
The appellants argue (brief, p. 7) that the examiner has
not shown any prior art that discloses or even suggests the
requirements of claim 2 and therefore provides no basis that
limitations of claim 2 are "an obvious design choice."
The examiner responded to this argument (answer, pp. 4
and 7) by citing and applying Figure 1 of Maeda which shows a
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007