Ex parte HERZOG et al. - Page 5




          Appeal No. 1999-1524                                       Page 5           
          Application No. 08/938,051                                                  


          respective positions articulated by the appellants and the                  
          examiner.  Upon evaluation of all the evidence before us, it                
          is our conclusion that the evidence adduced by the examiner is              
          insufficient to establish a prima facie case of obviousness                 
          with respect to the claims under appeal.  Accordingly, we will              
          not sustain the examiner's rejection of claims 1 to 8, 14, 15,              
          22, 24 and 26 to 31 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.  Our reasoning for               
          this determination follows.                                                 


               In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the examiner                
          bears the initial burden of presenting a prima facie case of                
          obviousness.  See In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28                    
          USPQ2d 1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir. 1993).  A prima facie case of                  
          obviousness is established by presenting evidence that would                
          have led one of ordinary skill in the art 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) and In re Lintner, 458 F.2d 1013,               
          1016, 173 USPQ 560, 562 (CCPA 1972).                                        


          Claim 15                                                                    







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

Last modified: November 3, 2007