Appeal No. 2001-1604
Application No. 08/785,912
The examiner relies on the following references:
Mogul 5,802,292 Sep. 1, 1998
(filed Apr. 28, 1995)
Nielsen 5,903,727 May 11, 1999
(filed Jun. 18, 1996)
Claims 1-20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as
unpatentable over the combination of Nielsen and Mogul.
Reference is made to the briefs and answers for the
respective positions of appellants and the examiner.
OPINION
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. §103, it is incumbent
upon the examiner to establish a factual basis to support the
legal conclusion of obviousness. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071,
1073, 5 USPQ2d 1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir. 1988). In so doing, the
examiner is expected to make the factual determinations set forth
in Graham v, John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 17, 148 USPQ 459, 467
(1966), and to provide a reason why one having ordinary skill in
the pertinent art would have been led to modify the prior art or
to combine prior art references to arrive at the claimed
invention. Such reason must stem from some teachings,
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007