Appeal No. 2000-0713
Application 08/864,726
examiner relies on an express or implicit showing, he must
provide reasons for finding a limitation to be taught or
suggested in the reference. Id.
We find no evidence in the record to support the
examiner's conclusion that the term ?tablet" would have
suggested to one of ordinary skill in the art an adhesive
preform having ?opposing convex curved surfaces, the perimeter
of the adhesive preform having concave shape edges" as
required by the claims on appeal. Moreover, the examiner has
not identified a showing of a suggestion or motivation to
modify the ?tablet" disclosed in Prud'Homme to have the shape
of the adhesive preform as recited in the claims on appeal.
Accordingly, we find that the examiner has not established a
prima facie case of obviousness and the rejection under 35
U.S.C. §103 is reversed.
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
REVERSED
Edward C. Kimlin )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007