Appeal No. 2005-1435
Application No. 09/906,564
positions. This review has led us to conclude that the
examiner’s Section 103 rejections are well founded.
Accordingly, we will sustain the examiner’s Section
103 rejections for essentially those findings of fact and
conclusions set forth in the Answer. We add the following
primarily for emphasis and completeness.
Under 35 U.S.C. § 103, to establish a prima facie case of
obviousness, explicit and/or implicit teachings in the applied
prior art references and/or knowledge generally available
to a person having ordinary skill in the art that would have
suggested the claimed subject matter are required. See
generally In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1447-48, 24 USPQ2d
1443, 1446-47 (Fed. Cir. 1992) (Nies, J., concurring); In re
Vaeck, 947 F.2d 488, 493, 20 USPQ2d 1438, 1442 (Fed. Cir.
1991); In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425, 208 USPQ 871, 881 (CCPA
1981; In re Preda, 401 F.2d 825, 826, 159 USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA
1968). The knowledge generally available to a person having
ordinary skill in the art includes the appellant’s admission
regarding what was known in the art at the time of the
appellant’s invention. See In re Nomiya, 509 F.2d 566, 570-71,
184 USPQ 607, 611-12 (CCPA 1975)(the admitted prior art in an
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007