Appeal No. 2000-1587
Application 09/055,254
by the Examiner and Appellants regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the answer (Paper No. 12,
mailed November 12, 1999) for the Examiner’s complete
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the brief
(Paper No. 11, filed October 26, 1999) and the reply brief
(Paper No. 13, filed January 12, 2000) for Appellants’
arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
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). The conclusion that the
claimed subject matter is obvious must be supported by
evidence, as shown by some objective teaching in the prior art
or by knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill
in the art that would have led that individual to combine the
relevant teachings of the references to arrive at the claimed
invention. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 1074, 5 USPQ2d
1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir. 1988). Furthermore, to reach a
conclusion of obviousness under § 103, the examiner must also
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007