Appeal No. 95-1901
Application 08/088,397
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Milheiser, Setoguchi and Aggers
further in view of Lichtenberger. Claim 23 stands rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Milheiser, Setoguchi
and Aggers further in view of Schwendeman.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellant and the
Examiner, reference is made to the brief and answer for the
respective details thereof.
OPINION
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 15 through 23
under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
The Examiner has failed to set forth a prima facie case. It
is the burden of the Examiner to establish why one having
ordinary skill in the art would have been led to the claimed
invention by the express teachings or suggestions found in the
prior art, or by implications contained in such teachings or
suggestions. In re Sernaker, 702 F.2d 989, 995, 217 USPQ 1, 6
(Fed. Cir. 1983). "Additionally, when determining obviousness,
the claimed invention should be considered as a whole; there is
no legally recognizable 'heart' of the invention." Para-Ordnance
Mfg. v. SGS Importers Int’l, Inc., 73 F.3d 1085, 1087, 37 USPQ2d
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007