Appeal No. 95-1220
Application 07/972,279
whole; there is no legally recognizable 'heart' of the
invention." Para-Ordnance Mfg., Inc. v. SGS Importers Int’l,
Inc., 73 F.3d 1085, 1087, 37 USPQ2d 1237, 1239 (Fed. Cir.
1995), cert. denied, 117 S.Ct. 80 (1996), citing W. L. Gore &
Assocs., Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1548, 220 USPQ
303, 309 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
After a careful review of Boone, we fail to find any
suggestion to modify Boone’s equation 22 to obtain Appellants’
equation as recited in claim 2. Therefore, we will not
sustain the Examiner’s rejection of claim 2.
Claim 14 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Crane, Boone and Levine. On page 6 of
the brief, Appellants state that because claim 14 depends from
claim 1 which is patentable over Crane and Boone for the
reasons stated for claim 1, claim 14 is also not rendered
obvious. We note that Appellants do not make any further
arguments.
We have found that claim 1 is properly rejected as
being unpatentable over Crane and Boone and thereby we do not
find that Appellants’ arguments for claim 1 overcome the
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007