Appeal No. 96-1247
Application 08/115,662
having ordinary skill in the art would have been led to the
claimed invention by the express teachings or suggestions
found in the prior art, or by implications contained in such
teachings or suggestions. In re Sernaker, 702 F.2d 989, 995,
217 USPQ 1, 6 (Fed. Cir. 1983). "Additionally, when determin-
ing 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), cert. denied, 117 S.Ct. 80 (1996)
citing W. L. Gore & Assoc., Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d
1540, 1548, 220 USPQ 303, 309 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied,
469 U.S. 851 (1984).
Claims 1 through 4, 6 through 8, 14 and 17 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Deyhimy. On page 3 of the Examiner's answer, the Examiner
argues that Deyhimy shows in Figure 3 all the structure set
forth in independent claims 1 and 14 except for the fact that
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007