Appeal No. 1998-0331
Application No. 08/297,257
We will not sustain the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of
claims 1, 2, 4, 10 through 12 and 14.
We begin by observing that in rejecting claims under
35 U.S.C. § 103, the examiner bears the initial burden of
presenting a prima facie case of obviousness. In re
Rijckaert,
9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In
re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed.
Cir. 1992). Only if that burden is met does the burden of
coming forward with either evidence or argument shift to the
applicant. Id. If the examiner fails to establish a prima
facie case, the rejection is improper and will be overturned.
In re Fine,
837 F.2d 1071, 1074, 5 USPQ2d 1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir. 1988).
Independent claim 1 is directed to a multiple spindle bar
machine and requires, inter alia, first and second sets of
tapered roller bearings rotatably supporting a spindle
carrier, each of the sets of roller bearings including tapered
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007