Appeal No. 2004-0670 Page 9
Application No. 09/276,741
findings, see 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(E)”). See also In re Lee, 277 F.3d 1338, 61
USPQ2d 1430 (Fed. Cir. 2002) (board decision denying patent must be founded
on necessary findings and must provide an administrative record showing the
evidence which the findings are based; the board must assure the requisite
findings are made, based on evidence of record).
In our opinion, the examiner failed to provide the evidence necessary to
establish a prima facie case of obviousness. Accordingly, we reverse the
rejection of claim 73 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the
combination of Bishop, Ramu, Rahman and Maier. Having determined that the
examiner has not established a prima facie case of obviousness, we find it
unnecessary to discuss the Hudes Declaration relied on by appellants to rebut
any such prima facie case.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this
appeal may be extended under 37 CFR § 1.136(a).
REVERSED
)
Sherman D. Winters )
Administrative Patent Judge )
) BOARD OF PATENT
)
Donald E. Adams ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge )
) INTERFERENCES
)
Lora M. Green )
Administrative Patent Judge )
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007