Appeal No. 1996-2798 Page 4
Application No. 08/109,597
OPINION
As an initial matter, appellants’ Brief contains a
statement that the present claims stand or fall together.
Accordingly, we select claim 6, the sole independent
composition claim, as representative of appellants’ invention
and limit our consideration to said claim. 37 CFR §
1.192(c)(7)(1995).
We have carefully considered all of the arguments advanced
by appellants and the examiner and agree with the appellants
that the aforementioned rejection is not well founded.
Accordingly, we will not sustain the rejection.
“[T]he examiner bears the initial burden, on review of the
prior art or on any other ground, of presenting a prima facie
case of unpatentability.” See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443,
1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992). The examiner
relies upon a combination of Asano and Hund to establish a
prima facie case of obviousness.
Asano discloses an electrically conductive substrate
optionally coated with an oxide layer which may be selected
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007