Appeal No. 1998-1803
Application 08/409,188
the burden then shifts to the applicant to overcome the prima
facie case with argument and/or evidence. Obviousness is then
determined on the basis of the evidence as a whole and the
relative persuasiveness of the arguments. See Id.; In re
Hedges, 783 F.2d 1038, 1039, 228 USPQ 685, 686 (Fed. Cir.
1986); In re Piasecki, 745 F.2d 1468, 1472, 223 USPQ 785, 788
(Fed. Cir. 1984); and In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1052, 189
USPQ 143, 147 (CCPA 1976). Only those arguments
actually made by appellant have been considered in this
decision. Arguments which appellant could have made but chose
not to make in the brief have not been considered [see 37 CFR
§ 1.192(a)].
The examiner observes that Campbell discloses a web
cutting system wherein templates are manipulated on a computer
screen to control where the cuts will be made on the sheet
material. With respect to each of the independent claims on
appeal, the examiner asserts that Campbell differs from the
claimed invention only in the claimed projection of an
identifying image onto the sheet material. Gerber teaches
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007