Appeal No. 2001-0476
Application No. 08/768,231
In light of the discussion supra, this application is
remanded to the Examiner for selection of the best (and
substantially limited in number of) references and ground of
rejection. All unnecessary, cumulative grounds of rejection and
references are expected not to be made/applied should the
Examiner consider the formulation of any new rejections. In any
event, for each reference relied upon in each rejection, the
PTO's policy is for the Examiner to compare the rejected claims
feature-by-feature with the reference. This comparison should
map the language of the claims to the specific page number,
column number, line number, drawing number, drawing reference
number, and/or quotation for each reference relied upon. See
MPEP § 1208. Also note Ex Parte Blanc, 13 USPQ2d at 1383 (BPAI
1989).
II. Determining the Scope of the Claims
The initial burden of presenting a prima facie case of
obviousness rests on the Examiner. In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443,
1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In meeting this
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007