Appeal No. 2000-0895
Application No. 08/754,797
response to the arguments presented by the appellants appear
in the answer (Paper No. 19, mailed August 30, 1999), while
the complete statement of the appellants’ arguments can be
found in the main and reply briefs (Paper Nos. 18 and 20,
filed May 3, 1999 and September 9, 1999, respectively).
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellants’ specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the
examiner. As a consequence of our review, we conclude that
the rejection cannot be sustained.
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 the
reference teachings would appear to be sufficient for one of
ordinary skill in the relevant art having the references
before him to make the proposed combination or other
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007