Thursday, October 25, 2012

Benefits must be shown with factual evidence

from Ex parte Hampel

Note also that, to establish a prima facie case of obviousness, the Examiner need not combine the prior art teachings in view of benefits contemplated by the applicant. See In re Beattie, 974 F.2d 1309, 1312 (Fed. Cir. 1992). And, though the Applicants may rebut the prima facie case by showing such benefits were unexpectedly good, that showing must be made with factual evidence. See In re Soni, 54 F.3d 746, 750 (Fed. Cir. 1995). Appellants’ conclusory statements about reduced granularity are insufficient. Id.


Post a Comment

<< Home