Appeal No. 1999-2590
Application 08/618,120
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 Appellants. Oetiker, 977 F.2d at 1445,
24 USPQ2d at 1444. See also In re Piasecki, 745 F.2d 1468,
1472, 223 USPQ 785, 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 is improper and
accordingly merits reversal. Fine, 837 F.2d at 1074, 5 USPQ2d
at 1598.
An obviousness analysis commences with a review and
consideration of all the pertinent evidence and arguments.
See Oetiker, 977 F.2d at 1445, 24 USPQ2d at 1444 (“In
reviewing the examiner’s decision on appeal, the Board must
necessarily weigh all of the evidence and argument.”).
Accordingly, we now consider the claims on appeal.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007