Appeal No. 1999-0259
Application 08/596,857
of Appel- lants and Examiner, for the reasons stated infra, we
reverse the rejection of claims 1-3, 10, 13, and 16-18 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Komoda.
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the
Examiner bears the initial burden of establishing a prima
facie case of obviousness. In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443,
1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992). See also
In re Piasecki, 745 F.2d 1468, 1472, 223 USPQ 785, 788 (Fed
Cir. 1984). The Examiner can satisfy this burden by showing
that some objective teaching in the prior art or knowledge
generally available to one
of ordinary skill in the art suggests the claimed subject
matter. In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 1074, 5 USPQ2d 1596, 1598
(Fed. Cir. 1988). Only if this initial burden is met does the
burden of coming forward with evidence or argument shift to
the Appellants. Oetiker, 977 F.2d at 1445, 24 USPQ2d at 1444.
See also Piasecki, 745 F.2d at 1472, 223 USPQ at 788 (“After a
prima facie case of obviousness has been established, the
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007