Appeal No. 2003-0994
Application No. 08/579,544
Claim 63 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
obvious over the combination of Travis and Huang and Corradi.
Throughout our opinion, we make references to the
Appellants' briefs, and to the Examiner's Answer for the
respective details thereof.1
OPINION
With full consideration being given to the subject matter on
appeal, the Examiner's rejections and the arguments of the
Appellants and the Examiner, for the reasons stated infra, we
reverse the Examiner's rejection of claims 16-22 and 38-63 under
35 U.S.C. § 103.
I. Whether the Rejection of Claims 16-19, 38-41, 45-55, and
59-63 Under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is proper?
It is our view, after consideration of the record before us,
that the evidence relied upon and the level of skill in the
particular art would not have suggested to one of ordinary skill
in the art the obviousness of the invention as set forth in
claims 16-19, 38-41, 45-55, and 59-63. Accordingly, we reverse.
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the Examiner
bears the initial burden of establishing a prima facie case of
1 Appellants filed an appeal brief on January 23, 2002.
Appellants filed a reply brief on August 28, 2002. The Examiner
mailed out an Examiner's Answer on June 20, 2002.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007