Appeal No. 1997-4115 Page 6
Application No. 08/325,765
Claims 1, 2, 4-10, and 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as obvious over Chandra in view of Washabaugh. Rather
than repeat the arguments of the appellant or examiner in
toto, we refer the reader to the brief and answer for the
respective details thereof.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we considered
the subject matter on appeal and the rejection and evidence
advanced by the examiner. Furthermore, we duly considered the
arguments of the appellant and examiner. After considering
the totality of the record, we are persuaded that the examiner
erred in rejecting claims 1, 2, 4-10, and 12. Accordingly, we
reverse.
We begin by noting three principles from In re Rijckaert,
9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir. 1993). (1)
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the patent examiner
bears the initial burden of establishing a prima facie case of
obviousness. (2) A prima facie case is established when
teachings from the prior art would appear to have suggested
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007