Appeal No. 2000-0449
Application No. 08/636,614
out a prima facie case. In re Alton, 76 F.3d 1168, 1172, 37
USPQ2d 1578, 1583 (Fed. Cir. 1996). Here, all the examiner
has done is, as noted above, to state in the final rejection
that the specification does not "adequately disclose" the
limitation in question; this is not sufficient to shift the
burden to appellant. However, even assuming that a prima
facie case had been established, we consider that it has been
overcome by appellant’s arguments. Specifically, appellant 5
points out that in Figure 6 there are solid lines in the mid-
regions of folded, sealed edges 82, 84 of the second
compartment 78 (in line with the edges of first compartment
72), and asserts that these lines illustrate the contours of
where the sheet 80 forming the second compartment overlaps the
ends of the "bubble" (first compartment) 74 (brief, page 6).
We agree with appellant that one of ordinary skill,
contemplating Figure 6, would view it as appellant suggests,
and therefore would have understood that, when the application
5We note that our consideration of this appeal has not
been facilitated by the fact that the Examiner’s Answer does
not contain a response to the arguments in appellant’s brief,
as required by MPEP § 1208, item (11), page 1200-16 (Rev. 1,
Feb. 2000).
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007