Appeal No. 2000-0433
Application 08/741,070
1532, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Oetiker,
977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443,1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992). A
prima facie case of obviousness is established by presenting
evidence indicating that the prior art teachings would have
appeared sufficient for one of ordinary skill in the relevant
art having those teachings before him to make the proposed
combination or other modification. See In re Lintner, 458
F.2d 1013, 1016, 173 USPQ 560, 562 (CCPA 1972). Furthermore,
the 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
prior art to arrive at the claimed invention. See In re Fine,
837 F.2d 1071, 1074, 5 USPQ2d 1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In
re Lalu, 747 F.2d 703, 705, 223 USPQ 1257, 1258 (Fed. Cir.
1984).
Additionally, a rejection based on § 103 must rest on a
factual basis with these facts interpreted without hindsight
reconstruction of the invention from the prior art. The
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007