Appeal No. 2000-0117 Page 7
Application No. 08/770,676
final rejection on claims 5 and 6 under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
second paragraph, as being “no longer applicable because they
were overcome by an amendment filed subsequent to the FINAL
rejection” (answer, page 2).
Second, on pages 6 and 7 of their brief, appellants have
grouped the claims as standing or falling together, i.e.,
claims 1 and 4 through 6 have been grouped together, claims 8
and 10 through 12 have been grouped together, and claims 2, 7
and 9 have been grouped together, however claim 9 does not
stand and fall with claims 2 and 7. Accordingly, we have
selected claim 1 from the first group, claim 8 from the second
group, and claims 2 and 9 from the third group as being
representative and will decide the appeal as to each of the
respective claim groupings on the basis of the claim(s)
selected therefrom.
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
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007