Appeal No. 2002-1885 Page 11
Application No. 08/966,453
U.S.P.Q. 1125, 1127 (Fed. Cir. 1984) [**14] (finding no
suggestion to modify a prior art device where the
modification would render the device inoperable for its
intended purpose).
Accordingly, from all of the above, we find that the examiner has
failed to establish a prima facie case of obviousness of claims
1-9. The rejection of claims 1-9 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is
therefore reversed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007