Appeal No. 1997-4217
Application No. 08/307,178
OPINION
We have considered the record before us, and we will
reverse the rejection of claims 1 to 18.
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, it is
incumbent upon the Examiner to establish a factual basis to
support the legal conclusion of obviousness. See In Re Fine,
837 F.2d 1071, 1073, 5 USPQ2d 1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir. 1988). In
so doing, the Examiner is expected to make the factual
determinations set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S.
1, 17, 148 USPQ 459, 467
(1966), and to provide a reason why one having ordinary skill
in the pertinent art would have been led to modify the prior
art or to combine prior art references to arrive at the
claimed invention. Such reason must stem from some teaching,
suggestion or implication in the prior art as a whole or
knowledge generally available to one having ordinary skill in
the art. Uniroyal, Inc. v. Rudkin-Wiley Corp., 837 F.2d 1044,
1051, 5 USPQ2d 1434, 1438 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S.
825 (1988); Ashland Oil, Inc. v. Delta Resins & Refractories,
Inc., 776 F.2d 281, 293,
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007