Appeal 2007-0576
Application 10/025,816
Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir. 1993)
(citing In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed.
Cir. 1992)). "'A prima facie case of obviousness is established when the
teachings from the prior art itself would appear to have suggested the
claimed subject matter to a person of ordinary skill in the art.'" In re Bell,
991 F.2d 781, 783, 26 USPQ2d 1529, 1531 (Fed. Cir. 1993) (quoting In re
Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1051, 189 USPQ 143, 147 (CCPA 1976)).
Here, the Examiner does not allege, let alone show, that the addition
of Gold or Correale cures the aforementioned deficiency of Lo. Therefore,
we reverse the obviousness rejections of claims 10-12, 14, 15, 27-29, 31, and
32, which depend from claims 1 or 18.
VI. CONCLUSION
In summary, the rejection of claims 1-9, 13, 16-26, 30, 33, and 34
under § 102(b) is reversed. The rejections of claims 10-12, 14, 15, 27-29,
31, and 32 under § 103(a) are also reversed.
REVERSED
tdl/ce
NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC
901 NORTH GLEBE ROAD, 11TH FLOOR
ARLINGTON VA 22203
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Last modified: September 9, 2013