Appeal No. 1998-2386
Application No. 08/757,749
portion of said overall image forming part thereof to assist
in completion of said overall image invisibly printed thereon
as a latent image”; marking means for developing the second
latent image portion; and a compatible visible image third
portion to be selected and movably associated with the
developed second image portion.
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 the examiner
bears the initial burden of presenting a prima facie case of
obviousness. In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d
1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443,
1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992). Only if that
burden is met does the burden of coming forward with evidence
or argument shift to the applicant. Id. If the examiner
fails to establish a prima facie case, the rejection is
improper and will be overturned. In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071,
1074, 5 USPQ2d 1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir. 1988). In order to
establish the prima facie obviousness of a claimed invention,
all the claim limitations must be taught or suggested by the
prior art. In re Royka, 490 F.2d 981, 985, 180 USPQ 580, 583
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007