Appeal No. 1999-2348
Application No. 08/586,716
Zoffinger, et al. (Zoffinger), Telephone Engineer &
Management, vol. 78, no. 1 (January 1, 1974).
Claims 1 to 24 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C § 103. For
evidence of obviousness the examiner presents Tayloe and Ono
with respect to claims 1, 2, 8, 10 to 13 and 19 to 24, and
adds Zoffinger to Tayloe and Ono with respect to claims 3 to
7, 9 and 14 to 18.
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellant and the
examiner, we make reference to the briefs2 and the answer for
the respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have considered the rejections advanced by the
examiner and the supporting arguments. We have, likewise,
reviewed the appellants’ arguments set forth in the briefs.
We reverse.
In our analysis, we are guided by the general proposition
that in an appeal involving a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103,
an examiner is under a burden to make out a prima facie case
of obviousness. If that burden is met, the burden of going
2 A reply brief was filed as paper no. 15 and the examiner noted its
entry without any further response, see paper no. 16.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007