Appeal No. 1999-1344
Application 08/364,718
Appellant and Examiner, for the reasons stated infra, we will
reverse the Examiner's rejection of claims 1-8 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as obvious over Lewis and Beckman.
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, 1471-72, 223 USPQ 785, 788 (Fed Cir. 1984)). The
Examiner can satisfy this burden only by showing some
objective teaching in the prior art or that knowledge
generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art would
lead that individual to combine the relevant teachings of the
references. In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 1074, 5 USPQ2d 1596,
1598. Only if this initial burden is met does the burden of
coming forward with evidence or argument shift to the
Appellant. See 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
burden of going forward shifts to the applicant."). If the
examiner fails to establish a prima facie case, the rejection
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007