Appeal No. 2000-1948 Page 4 Application No. 08/751,087 with respect to the claims under appeal. Accordingly, we will not sustain the examiner's rejection of claims 2 to 5, 12, 16 and 17 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Our reasoning for this determination follows. 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). Claims 2 to 5, 12 and 16 We will not sustain the rejection of claims 2 to 5, 12 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Claim 2 reads as follows:Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007