Appeal No. 2002-1952
Application No. 09/071,373
assertion that Kelly’s “bookmark” feature is equivalent to the
teaching of setting a reminder for later viewing (answer, page
7).
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). To reach a conclusion of
obviousness under § 103, the examiner must produce a factual
basis supported by teaching in a prior art reference or shown to
be common knowledge of unquestionable demonstration. Our
reviewing court requires this evidence in order to establish a
prima facie case. In re Piasecki, 745 F.2d 1468, 1471-72, 223
USPQ 785, 787-88 (Fed. Cir. 1984). The Examiner must not only
identify the elements in the prior art, but also show “some
objective teaching in the prior art or that knowledge generally
available to one of ordinary skill in the art would lead the
individual to combine the relevant teachings of the references.”
In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 1074, 5 USPQ2d 1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir.
1988).
A review of Florin confirms that the reference relates to a
system for viewing and interacting with programs and services
from a number of sources and to a controller for managing the
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007