Appeal No. 1996-2958
Application No. 08/150,053
Sys., Inc. v. Montefiore Hosp., 732 F.2d 1572, 1577, 221 USPQ
929,
933 (Fed. Cir. 1984). These showings by the Examiner are an
essential part of complying with the burden of presenting a
prima facie case of obviousness. Note In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d
1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
With respect to independent claims 1 and 12, the Examiner
proposes to modify the traffic signal light regulating system
of Marcy by relying on Kishi to supply a teaching of utilizing
movable or portable traffic lights. In the Examiner’s view,
the skilled artisan would have found it obvious to make the
traffic light system of Marcy portable so as to facilitate
installation in temporary situations in view of the teachings
of Kishi. (Answer, page 4).
In response, Appellants assert the failure of the
Examiner to establish a prima facie case of obviousness since
Marcy, the primary reference relied on by the Examiner, fails
to disclose a number of features recited in the claims on
appeal. Upon careful review of the Marcy and Kishi references
in light of the arguments of record, we are in agreement with
Appellants’ stated position in the Briefs.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007