Appeal No. 1999-0939 Page 4
Application No. 08/593,334
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the examiner
bears the initial burden of presenting a prima facie case of
obviousness. See In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28
USPQ2d 1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir. 1993). A prima facie case of
obviousness is established by presenting evidence that would
have led one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the
relevant teachings of the references to arrive at the claimed
invention. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 1074, 5 USPQ2d
1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir. 1988) and In re Lintner, 458 F.2d 1013,
1016, 173 USPQ 560, 562 (CCPA 1972).
Claim 13, the sole independent claim on appeal, recites a
method of fastening two members together, comprising the steps
of (1) providing first and second members, (2) piecering the
second member to form an aperture and cleavage and then
deforming the aperture and cleavage into a wall having a
thread-like helical form, (3) bringing the first and second
members together in face to face relationship, (4) inserting a
tubular fastener through the aperture in the second member and
an aperture in the first member, and (5) radially expanding a
shank of the tubular fastener thereby causing the wall having
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007