Appeal No. 2001-2503 Application No. 09/075,767 (“Where, as here, the prior art disclosure suggests the outer limits of the range of suitable values, and the optimum resides within that range, and where there are indications elsewhere that in fact the optimum should be sought within that range, the determination of optimum values outside that range may not be obvious.”). CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above and in the Brief, we agree with appellants that the examiner has not presented a prima facie case of unpatentability. Accordingly, the decision of the examiner is reversed. REVERSED CHUNG K. PAK ) Administrative Patent Judge ) ) ) BOARD OF PATENT THOMAS WALTZ ) APPEALS Administrative Patent Judge ) AND ) INTERFERENCES ) ) JEFFREY SMITH ) Administrative Patent Judge ) CP/dal 6Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007