Appeal No. 2001-0600
Application No. 08/584,776
dyeings.” Examiner’s answer, page 6.
In determining the patentability of claims, the Federal
Circuit requires that the Board insure that the requisite
findings are made based on the evidence of record. See In re
Lee, 277 F.3d 1338, 1342, 61 USPQ2d 1430, 1432-33 (Fed. Cir.
2002). The Board must set forth its findings and the grounds
thereof as supported by the agency record and explain its
application of the law to the facts. Id. The Board’s decision
must be supported by substantial evidence. In re Zurko, 258 F.3d
1379, 1381, 59 USPQ2d 1693, 1694 (Fed. Cir. 2001).
In the present case, the examiner has simply failed to
provide sufficient evidence in support of his position.
Accordingly, we are constrained to reverse the examiner’s prior
art rejections for failure to establish a prima facie case of
obviousness. In particular, we find that the record is devoid of
evidence to support the following conclusions reached by the
examiner in rejecting the claims.
In rejecting the claims, the examiner takes the position
that it is generally known that the $ modification of azo dyes
is a more stable crystal modification. See Examiner’s answer,
page 4. We do not agree that the secondary references
necessarily support this proposition. Koller, Sommer, and
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007