Appeal No. 2005-0918 Page 4
Application No. 09/785,423
examiner is insufficient to establish a prima facie case of obviousness with respect to
the claims under appeal. Accordingly, we will not sustain the examiner's rejection of
claims 1 to 17 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Our reasoning for this determination follows.
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the examiner bears the initial burden
of presenting a prima facie case of obviousness. See In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531,
1532, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir. 1993). A prima facie case of obviousness is
established by presenting evidence that would have led one of ordinary skill in the art to
combine the relevant teachings of the references to arrive at the claimed invention. See
In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 1074, 5 USPQ2d 1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir. 1988) and In re
Lintner, 458 F.2d 1013, 1016, 173 USPQ 560, 562 (CCPA 1972).
Claims 1 and 5, the independent claims on appeal, read as follows:
1. A tape carrier package film for a liquid crystal display, comprising:
a tape carrier package part having a mounting portion for a driving
integrated circuit, wherein the tape carrier package part is defined by
depressions;
a peripheral part for securing the tape carrier package part, said peripheral
part having a plurality of sprocket holes; and
a plurality of punching holes formed by cutting a part of the tape carrier
package part and a part of the peripheral part for reducing a connection between
the tape carrier package part and the peripheral part.
5. A tape carrier package film, comprising:
a peripheral part having sprocket holes; and
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007