Appeal No. 1999-0162
Application No. 08/414,248
removal from one cartridge and insertion into another was
“notoriously old and well known in the information processing
art.” (Answer, page 6).
In response, Appellants assert several arguments in
support of their position that the Examiner has not
established proper motivation for the proposed combination of
references so as to set forth a prima facie case of
obviousness. After careful review of the applied prior art in
light of the arguments of record, we are in agreement with
Appellants’ position as stated in the Brief.
Initially, we agree with Appellants’ contention (Brief,
page 11) that the Examiner’s assertion that Appellants’
claimed disk exchanging limitations are standard manipulations
for multi-disk cartridge disk drives is devoid of any
supporting evidence on the record. We are not inclined to
dispense with proof by evidence when the proposition at issue
is not supported by a teaching
in a prior art reference, common knowledge or capable of
unquestionable demonstration. Precedents of our reviewing
court require this evidence in order to establish a prima
facie case. In re Knapp-Monarch Co., 296 F.2d 230, 232, 132
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007