Prima facie case of obviousness

From Ex parte Viola

As to the prima facie case of obviousness:

“In proceedings before the Patent and Trademark Office, the
Examiner bears the burden of establishing a prima face case of obviousness
based upon the prior art.” In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1265 (Fed. Cir. 1992).

As to term meaning:

Prior art references may be
“indicative of what all those skilled in the art generally believe a certain term
means ... [and] can often help to demonstrate how a disputed term is used by
those skilled in the art.” Vitronics Corp. v. Conceptronic, Inc., 90 F.3d
1576, 1584 (Fed. Cir. 1996).

Of KSR:

“The combination of familiar elements according to known methods
is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results.”
KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416 (2007). “If a person of
ordinary skill can implement a predictable variation, § 103 likely bars its
patentability.” Id. at 417. As noted by the Court in KSR, “[a] person of
ordinary skill is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automaton.” 550
U.S. at 421.