Appeal No. 2003-1070 Application 09/021,727 reverse the Examiner’s rejection of claims 30, 34, 38, 41, 43, 44, and 50 through 66 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 USPQ2d 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. Oetiker, 977 F.2d at 1445, 24 USPQ2d at 1444. See also Piasecki, 745 F.2d at 1472, 223 USPQ at 788. 1(...continued) Examiner mailed an Examiner’s Answer on May 21, 2002. The Appellants filed a reply brief on July 19, 2002. The Examiner mailed out an Office communication stating that the reply brief has been entered on September 24, 2002. The Examiner mailed a Supplemental Examiner’s Answer on December 20, 2002. 8Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007