Appeal No. 95-5066
Serial No. 07/931,330
invention. We find that the only incentive to use staggered welding to anchor ceramic green
sheet (i.e., foils) together in this case is provided by appellant’s disclosure. Accordingly, we reverse the
examiner's rejection of claims 1-3 and 5-7 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Hamuro in view of Newton.
With regard to the Baesse Declaration, since the prior art relied on by the examiner fails
to establish a prima facie case of obviousness, we need not consider the appellant's rebuttal evidence.
In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 1076, 5 USPQ2d 1596, 1600 (Fed. Cir. 1988).
OTHER MATTERS
In the event of further prosecution, the examiner and appellant should consider:
(a) there is an Information Disclosure Statement filed January 27, 1993 which apparently has
not been entered into the file and considered by the examiner; and,
(b) pending claims 6 and 7 still recite "inclusive" after "Claim 1" in their respective first lines,
contrary to the claims listed in appellant’s APPENDIX as being correct by the examiner.
Page 21
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007