The opinion in support of the decision being entered
today was not written for publication and is not binding
precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 16
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_______________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_______________
Ex parte JIMMY F. HOLCOMB
______________
Appeal No. 2003-1645
Application 09/803,720
_______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before GARRIS, WARREN and OWENS, Administrative Patent Judges.
WARREN, Administrative Patent Judge.
Decision on Appeal and Opinion
We have carefully considered the record in this appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134, including
the opposing views of the examiner, in the answer, and appellant, in the brief, and reply brief and
based on our review, find that we cannot sustain the rejection of appealed claims 1 through 3,1 all
of the claims in the application, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Welch.2
We refer to the examiner’s answer and to appellant’s brief and reply brief for a complete
exposition of the opposing positions advanced on appeal.
It is well settled that in order to establish a prima facie case of obviousness under
§ 103(a), the examiner must show that some objective teaching, suggestion or motivation in the
1 See the appendix to the brief
2 Answer, pages 3-4.
- 1 -
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007