Appeal No. 1999-2277
Application 08/803,578
the Appellant’s Brief1 and Examiner’s Answer2 for the respective
details thereof.
OPINION
With full consideration being given the subject matter on
appeal, the Examiner’s rejection and the arguments of Appellant
and Examiner, for the reasons stated infra, we will reverse the
Examiner’s rejection of claims 1, 4-8, 10, 11, 13 and 15-17
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Kudo.
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). 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 (Fed. Cir. 1988). Only if this initial
1 Appellant filed a Brief for Appellant on June 9, 1998.
2 The Examiner, in response to Appellant’s Brief, mailed
an Examiner's Answer on December 23, 1998.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007