Appeal No. 2000-0915 Page 3
Application No. 09/064,083
rejection, we make reference to the final rejection (Paper No.
7, mailed February 26, 1999) and the answer (Paper No. 13,
mailed September 7, 1999) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejection, and to the brief (Paper
No. 12, filed August 24, 1999) for the appellants' arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellants' specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the
examiner. Upon evaluation of all the evidence before us, it
is our conclusion that the evidence adduced by the examiner is
insufficient to establish a prima facie case of obviousness2
with respect to the claims under appeal. Accordingly, we will
not sustain the examiner's rejection of claims 1 to 9 under 35
U.S.C. § 103. Our reasoning for this determination follows.
2In 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).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007