Appeal No. 1998-1539
Application No. 08/683,186
identify what is recited in the claims and state, generally,
that the feature is “neither taught nor suggested in the
references” (principal brief-page 5), the initial burden to
establish a prima facie case of obviousness is the examiner’s.
Since the examiner pays no attention to the dependent claims,
we cannot say that a prima facie case has been set forth.
Accordingly, we will not sustain the rejection of claims 8 and
9 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on the examiner’s lack of a
specific rationale for rejecting such claims.
We have sustained the rejection of claim 5 under 35
U.S.C.
§ 103 but we have not sustained the rejection of claims 8 and
9 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Accordingly, the examiner’s decision is affirmed-in-part.
No time period for taking any subsequent action
in connection with this appeal may be extended under
37 CFR § 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Errol A. Krass )
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007