Appeal No. 95-2399
Application 08/061,669
The Examiner relies on the following references:
Palmer 4,431,260 Feb. 14, 1984
Bowen et al. (Bowen) 4,991,929 Feb. 12, 1991
Cammons et al. (Cammons) 5,082,345 Jan. 21, 1992
Claims 1 through 3 and 5 through 10 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Cammons in view
of Palmer or Bowen.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and
the Examiner, reference is made to the brief and answer for the 2
respective details thereof.
OPINION
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 1 through 3
and 5 through 10 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
2We note that Appellants filed a brief on September 16,
1994. The Examiner mailed on December 1, 1997 a notification of
non-compliance stating that the brief does not contain a correct
copy of the appealed claims. On December 30, 1997, Appellants
filed a brief. The brief is the same brief as filed on September
16, 1994 with the exception of the appendix which contains a copy
of the appealed claims. We note that the Examiner has entered
this brief into the record.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007