Ex parte KENMOCHI et al. - Page 3




          Appeal No. 1999-2159                                       Page 3           
          Application No. 08/746,953                                                  


          filed January 19, 1999) for the appellants' arguments                       
          thereagainst.                                                               


                                       OPINION                                        
               In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given                 
          careful consideration to the appellants' specification and                  
          claims, to the applied prior art, and to the respective                     
          positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner.                   
          Upon evaluation of all the evidence before us, it is our                    
          conclusion that the evidence adduced by the examiner is                     
          insufficient to establish a prima facie case of obviousness                 
          with respect to the claims under appeal.  Accordingly, we will              
          not sustain the examiner's rejection of claims 1 to 5 and 7                 
          under 35 U.S.C. § 103.  Our reasoning for this determination                
          follows.                                                                    


               In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the examiner                
          bears the initial burden of presenting a prima facie case of                
          obviousness.  See In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28                    
          USPQ2d 1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir. 1993).  A prima facie case of                  
          obviousness is established by presenting evidence that would                







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007