Appeal No. 2002-1400
Application No. 09/131,279
appealed claims is:
Payne et al. (Payne) 5,854,694 Dec. 29, 1998
Claims 1-15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Payne.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
appellant regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the examiner's
answer (Paper No. 15, mailed Sep. 13, 2001) for the examiner's reasoning in support of
the rejections, and to appellant's brief (Paper No. 14, filed Jun. 21, 2001) and reply brief
(Paper No. 17, filed Nov. 13, 2001) for appellant's arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
appellant's specification and claims, to the applied prior art reference, and to the
respective positions articulated by appellant and the examiner. As a consequence of
our review, we make the determinations which follow.
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the examiner bears the initial burden
of presenting a prima facie case of obviousness. See In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531,
1532, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir. 1993). A prima facie case of obviousness is
established by presenting evidence that the reference teachings would appear to be
sufficient for one of ordinary skill in the relevant art having the references before him to
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007