Ex parte WALKER - Page 3




              Appeal No. 1999-1799                                                                                         
              Application No. 08/738,507                                                                                   


              Claims 1-8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over                                   
              Yoshimura in view of Kinoshita or Bell.                                                                      
              Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and the                            
              appellant regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the examiner's                          
              answer (Paper No. 11, mailed Jan. 19, 1999) for the examiner's reasoning in support of                       
              the rejections, and to the appellant's brief (Paper No. 10, filed Nov. 9, 1998) for the                      
              appellant's arguments thereagainst.                                                                          


                                                        OPINION                                                            

              In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to the                          
              appellant's specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the                        
              respective positions articulated by the appellant and the examiner.  As a consequence of                     
              our review, we make the determinations which follow.                                                         
              “To reject claims in an application under section 103, an examiner must show an                              
              unrebutted prima facie case of obviousness.   See In re Deuel, 51 F.3d 1552, 1557,  34                       

              USPQ2d 1210, 1214 (Fed. Cir. 1995).  In the absence of a proper prima facie case of                          
              obviousness, an applicant who complies with the other statutory requirements is entitled to                  
              a patent.  See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445,  24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir.                          

              1992).  On appeal to the Board, an applicant can overcome a rejection by showing                             


                                                            3                                                              





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007