Appeal No. 2002-2295
Application 08/988,457
Opinion
With full consideration being given to the subject matter on
appeal, the Examiner’s rejection and the arguments of Appellants
and Examiner, for the reasons stated infra, we reverse the
Examiner’s rejection of claims 1 through 3, 5, 7, 8, 11 through
14, 16, 17 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the Examiner
bears the initial burden of establishing a prima facie case of
obviousness. In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24 USPQ 1443,
1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992). See also In re Piasecki, 745 F.2d 1468,
1472, 223 USPQ 785, 788 (Fed. Cir. 1984). The Examiner can
satisfy this burden by showing that some objective teaching in
the prior art or knowledge generally available to one of ordinary
skill in the art suggests the claimed subject matter. In re
Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 1074, 5 USPQ2d 1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir. 1988).
Only if this initial burden is met does the burden of coming
forward with evidence or argument shift to the Appellants.
Oeticker, 977 F.2d at 1445, 24 USPQ at 1444. See also Piasecki,
745 F.2d at 1472, 223 USPQ at 788.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007