Appeal No. 1998-1248
Application No. 08/460,086
Claims 10 through 12 and 18 through 23 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Carroll and
Lauw.
Claims 13 through 17 and 24 through 33 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Carroll, Lauw
and Geary.
Rather then reiterate the arguments of the Appellant and
the Examiner, we refer to the briefs and the answer for the 1
respective details thereof.
OPINION
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 10 through 33
based upon 35 U.S.C. § 103. The Examiner has not 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 lead to the claimed invention by the express teachings or
suggestions found in the prior art or by the implication
contained in such teachings or suggestions. In re Sernaker,
702 F.2d 989, 995, 217 USPQ 1, 6 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
1Appellant filed an appeal brief on April 7, 1997. On
September 16, 1997 Appellant filed a reply brief. On January
15, 1998 the Examiner mailed a letter stating that Appellant's
request to enter the reply brief was granted.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007