Applicant wins reversal on obviousness in Hansted
“In proceedings before the Patent and Trademark Office, the
Examiner bears the burden of establishing a prima facie case of obviousness
based upon the prior art.” In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1265 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
“During examination, the patent application claims may be given their
broadest interpretation consistent with the specification, in order to facilitate
sharpening and clarifying the claims at the application stage.” In re Buszard,
504 F.3d 1364, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2007).
Therefore, reading the claims using the broadest reasonable
interpretation of the term “transdermal patch” in light of the art and the
Specification, the Examiner provides no evidence to suggest that the
perfume, fragrance, or cosmetic sampler of Muchin functions to deliver
these components through the skin into the bloodstream as required by the
limitation to a transdermal patch.