Ex parte SHINBASHI et al. - Page 6

          Appeal No. 95-3710                                                          
          Application 07/621,005                                                      

          "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 1237,              
          1239 (Fed. Cir. 1995), 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).                                   
               Appellants argue on pages 6-7 of the brief and pages 2-3 of            
          the reply brief that the Examiner has failed to show that the               
          prior art would have suggested to those skilled in the art to               
          modify the structures illustrated in Figures 2 and 3 to obtain a            
          switching system as recited in Appellants' claims.  Appellants              
          point out that the Examiner has only provided conjecture after              
          reading Appellants' specification of what one of ordinary skill             
          in the art would have found obvious.  Appellants argue the                  
          Examiner is relying upon personal interpretation of what the                
          Examiner considers to be obvious without having submitted any               
          evidence such as a teaching in the prior art or an Affidavit                
          setting forth the Examiner's experience and knowledge as of the             
          effective filing date.                                                      
               The Federal Circuit states that "[t]he mere fact that the              
          prior art may be modified in the manner suggested by the Examiner           

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007