The opinion in support of the decision being entered
today was not written for publication and is not binding
precedent of the Board.
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_______________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_______________
Ex parte JOSEF THEURER
and MANFRED BRUNNINGER
______________
Appeal No. 2006-0461
Application 10/457,198
_______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before PAK, WARREN and KRATZ, Administrative Patent Judges.
WARREN, Administrative Patent Judge.
Decision on Appeal and Opinion
We have carefully considered the record in this appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134, and based
on our review, find that we cannot sustain the rejection of appealed claim 1, the sole claim in the
application, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Plasser in view of Bleeker
(answer, pages 3-4).
We refer to the answer and to the brief and reply brief for a complete exposition of the
positions advanced by the examiner and appellants.
It is well settled that in order to establish a prima facie case of obviousness under
§ 103(a), the examiner must show that some objective teaching, suggestion or motivation in the
applied prior art taken as a whole and/or knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill
in this art would have led that person to the claimed invention as a whole, including each and
every limitation of the claims arranged as required by the claims, without recourse to the
- 1 -
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007