Ex parte GRABHORN - Page 10




          Appeal No. 1999-2446                                      Page 10           
          Application No. 08/705,592                                                  


               We will not sustain the examiner's rejection of claims 6,              
          7, 9 to 17 and 19 to 25 under 35 U.S.C.  103 as being                      
          unpatentable over Stacy.                                                    


               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).                                        


               All the claims under appeal recite wood fragments within               
          a mesh-type container.  Stacy teaches only the use of straw                 
          within a mesh-type container.  Thus, Stacy does not teach or                
          suggest the wood fragments as set forth in each of the                      










Page:  Previous  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007