Appeal No. 1997-3646 Page 9
Application No. 08/172,521
For the foregoing reasons, we find that the examiner has
not established a prima facie case of obviousness. Because we
reverse the stated rejection of claims 15, 16, 19-24 and 26-29
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Lindblad (EP
’292) in view of Takei (JP ’153) on this basis, we need not
reach
the issue of the sufficiency of the asserted showing of
unexpected results. See In re Geiger, 815 F.2d 686, 688, 2
USPQ2d 1276, 1278 (Fed. Cir. 1987).
Since the examiner has not shown how the other references
that are additionally applied against each of claims 17 and 25
make up for the above-noted deficiencies, we shall also
reverse the § 103 rejections of those claims.
CONCLUSION
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007