Appeal No. 1997-2384 Page 4
Application No. 08/430,083
(b) an active hydrogen-containing chain extender.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Mosbach et al. (Mosbach) 5,098,983 Mar.
24, 1992
Coogan et al. (Coogan) 5,169,895 Dec. 08,
1992
Claims 15-20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Coogan in view of Mosbach.
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. In so doing, we find ourselves in agreement with
appellants that the examiner fails to establish a prima facie
case of obviousness for the claimed subject matter.3
Accordingly, we will not sustain the examiner's rejection, as
stated.
3We note that it is the examiner who bears the initial
burden of presenting a prima facie case of obviousness in
rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103. See In re Rijckaert,
9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007