Appeal No. 1997-1336
Application 08/267,433
With respect to independent claim 1, the examiner notes
that Yamane teaches the claimed invention except for the fuse
wire being exposed or extended from a face of the resin
package. The examiner cites Bougger as a teaching that it was
conventional to bond electronic components at the face of a
resin package. The examiner concludes that it would have been
obvious to extend the Yamane fuse element to the face of the
resin package to implement an electrical connection as taught
by Bougger [final rejection, pages 3-4]. In our view, the
examiner’s analysis is sufficiently reasonable that we find
that the examiner has satisfied the burden of presenting a
prima facie case of obviousness. That is, the examiner’s
analysis, if left unrebutted, would be sufficient to support a
rejection under
35 U.S.C. § 103. The burden is, therefore, upon appellant to
come forward with evidence or arguments which persuasively
rebut the examiner’s prima facie case of obviousness.
Appellant has presented several substantive arguments in
response to the examiner’s rejection. Therefore, we consider
obviousness based upon the totality of the evidence and the
relative persuasiveness of the arguments.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007