Appeal No. 2004-2244
Application No. 10/208,906
laminate of Holtrop, which is used in preparing headliners for
automobiles, would have any need for a selvedged periphery of the
type taught by Van Auken as useful in a roofing system for
supporting a fallen object such as a 200-300 pound man (e.g., see
the paragraph bridging columns 1 and 2 as well as the first
paragraph in column 3 of Van Auken).
For at least the reasons set forth above, it is apparent
that the examiner has failed to carry his burden of establishing
a prima facie case of obviousness. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d
1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992). It follows
that we cannot sustain his section 103 rejection of all appealed
claims as being unpatentable over Holtrop in view of Van Auken.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007