Ex Parte Tarquini et al - Page 6

                    Appeal 2007-1276                                                                                                      
                    Application 10/001,446                                                                                                
                            interconnect devices.  (Col. 6, ll. 1-3; col. 15, ll. 27-47; Fig. 17.)  The                                   
                            network management station includes a processor and a system bus to                                           
                            which, among other things, RAM, storage devices, and other                                                    
                            peripherals are connected.  (Col. 5, ll. 10-16; Fig. 3.)                                                      

                                                     PRINCIPLES OF LAW                                                                    
                            On appeal, all timely filed evidence and properly presented argument                                          
                    is considered by the Board.  See In re Piasecki, 745 F.2d 1468, 1472, 223                                             
                    USPQ 785, 788 (Fed. Cir. 1984).                                                                                       
                            In the examination of a patent application, the Examiner bears the                                            
                    initial burden of showing a prima facie case of unpatentability.  Id.  When                                           
                    that burden is met, the burden then shifts to the applicant to rebut.  Id.; see                                       
                    also In re Harris, 409 F.3d 1339, 1343-44, 74 USPQ2d 1951, 1954 (Fed.                                                 
                    Cir. 2005) (finding rebuttal evidence unpersuasive).  If the applicant                                                
                    produces rebuttal evidence of adequate weight, the prima facie case of                                                
                    unpatentability is dissipated.  In re Piasecki, 745 F.2d at 1472, 223 USPQ at                                         
                    788.  Thereafter, patentability is determined in view of the entire record.  Id.                                      
                    However, on appeal to the Board it is an appellant's burden to establish that                                         
                    the Examiner did not sustain the necessary burden and to show that the                                                
                    Examiner erred -- on appeal we will not start with a presumption that the                                             
                    Examiner is wrong.                                                                                                    
                            Anticipation is established when a single prior art reference discloses                                       
                    expressly or under the principles of inherency each and every limitation of                                           
                    the claimed invention.  Atlas Powder Co. v. IRECO Inc., 190 F.3d 1342,                                                
                    1347, 51 USPQ2d 1943, 1946 (Fed. Cir. 1999); In re Paulsen, 30 F.3d 1475,                                             
                    1478-79, 31 USPQ2d 1671, 1673 (Fed. Cir. 1994).                                                                       


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013