Appeal No. 1998-0931 Page 16
Application No. 08/139,619
In sum, we find that the examiner has failed to establish
a prima facie case of obviousness of the invention set forth
in claim 15. Because the examiner has not set forth a prima
facie case of obviousness, we need not reach the two
declarations filed under 37 CFR § 1.132. Accordingly, the
rejection of claim 15 and dependent claims 18-20 is reversed.
We turn next to the rejection of claims 16 and 17 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over the teachings of Hedges
and Tillery, further in view of Yamamura. As Yamamura does
not overcome the deficiencies of the basic combination of
Hedges and Tillery, the rejection of claims 16 and 17 under 35
U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject
claims 15-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
REVERSED
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007