1. When an Examiner rejects a claim on the basis of obviousness, must that rejection contain within its four corners all of the elements of a prima facie case of obviousness, or may necessary elements of that prima facie case be omitted, to be supplied by the Court on appeal? Put another way, can an Examiner’s rejection which lacks all of the elements of a prima facie case of unpatentability be sustained? 2. Is Randall Mfg. v. Rea, 733 F.3d 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2013), which requires the PTAB to consider arguments not made or adopted by the Examiner, decided correctly?