Appeal No. 1997-0525 Page 7
Application No. 08/355,931
On this record, the examiner has not proffered
satisfactory supporting evidence or a convincing rationale
that specifically addresses how the applied references would
have taught or suggested the method of either of claims 7 or 8
or the apparatus of claims 9 and 10 including the limitations
discussed above.
The statements pertaining to the obviousness rejections set
forth in the several papers and answers as relied upon by the
examiner are simply not enough to sustain an obviousness
determination.
For the foregoing reasons, we find that the examiner has
not established a prima facie case of obviousness. Because we
reverse on this basis, we need not reach the issue of the
sufficiency of the asserted showing of unexpected results
(brief, page 10). See In re Geiger, 815 F.2d 686, 688, 2
USPQ2d 1276, 1278 (Fed. Cir. 1987).
CONCLUSION
The decision of the examiner to reject claims 7 and 8
under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph as being indefinite
for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007