Appeal No. 96-2190
Application 08/287,758
through 14.
The Examiner has failed to set forth a prima facie case
of obviousness. It is the burden of the Examiner to establish
why
one having ordinary skill in the art would have been led to
the
claimed invention by the express teachings or suggestions
found in the 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
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 Importer
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).
At the outset, we note that claims 1 through 14 stand or
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007