Appeal No. 2001-0465
Application No. 09/070,039
REJECTION AT ISSUE
Claims 1-14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Nielson in view of Vishlitzky.
Rather than repeat the arguments of Appellants or Examiner,
we make reference to the brief and the answer for the respective
details thereof.
OPINION
With full consideration being given to the subject matter on
appeal, the Examiner's rejection and the arguments of Appellants
and Examiner, for reasons stated infra, we reverse the Examiner's
rejection of claims 1-14 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the Examiner
bears the initial burden of establishing a prima facie case of
obviousness. In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24 USPQ 1443,
1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992). See also In re Piasecki, 745 F.2d 1468,
1472, 223 USPQ 785, 788 (Fed. Cir. 1984). The Examiner can
satisfy this burden by showing that some objective teaching in
the prior art or knowledge generally available to one of ordinary
skill in the art suggests the claimed subject matter. In re
Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 1074, 5 USPQ2d 1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir. 1988).
Only if this initial burden is met does the burden of coming
55
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007