Ex parte GILLIG et al. - Page 4




          Appeal No. 1998-1491                                       Page 4           
          Application No. 08/654,502                                                  


          35 U.S.C.  103 as obvious over Hofmann in view of Martiny,                 
          Bhagat, Sasaki, or Nonami.  Rather than repeat the arguments                
          of the appellants 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 advanced by                 
          the examiner.  Furthermore, we duly considered the arguments                
          and evidence of the appellants and examiner.  After                         
          considering the totality of the record, we are persuaded that               
          the examiner erred in rejecting claims 30-57.  Accordingly, we              
          reverse.                                                                    


               We begin by noting the following principles from In re                 
          Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir.               
          1993).                                                                      
               In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. Section 103, the                   
               examiner bears the initial burden of presenting a                      
               prima facie case of obviousness.  In re Oetiker, 977                   







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007