Appeal No. 2001-0034
Application 08/944,807
The only other place in the answer where the examiner
attempts to support the standing rejection with specific
teachings from the White reference is found in the second
paragraph on page 7 of the answer, wherein the examiner provides
what appears at first blush to be a large block quotation from
White, but which is actually a series of no less than four (4)
separate and distinct short quotes from various locations in
White’s specification.1 Notably missing is any explanation of
the relevance of these quotes to the obviousness issue at hand.
In particular, there is no explanation of precisely where White
teaches “allow[ing] manual shifting in the automatically
selectable transmission gears” as asserted by the examiner in the
last paragraph on page 6 of the answer.
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the examiner
bears the initial burden of presenting a prima facie case of
obviousness. In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532. 28 USPQ2d 1955,
1 As a courtesy to both the Board and counsel for appellants,
the examiner should in the future more clearly identify the
source of short quotations taken from references. This can be
accomplished by separating individual passages from each other by
their own set of quotation marks, and by pinpointing their
location within the document by using both the column number and
the specific line numbers where they appear.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007