Appeal No. 1998-0224 Application No. 08/291,564 825 (1988); Ashland Oil, Inc. v. Delta Resins & Refractories, Inc., 776 F.2d 281, 293, 227 USPQ 657, 664 (Fed. Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1017 (1986); ACS Hosp. 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 the Examiner’s obviousness rejection of independent claims 18 and 25, Appellants’ primary argument in the Briefs centers on the contention that Fraughton fails to disclose the generation of collision evasive maneuvers and the synchronized transmission of such evasive maneuvers to other vehicles as claimed. After careful review of the Fraughton reference in light of the arguments of record, we are in agreement with Appellants’ position as stated in the Briefs. We note that the relevant portion of independent claim 18 7Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007