Appeal No. 96-2838 Application 08/336,721 represent how long a current increase in said electrical system has lasted. The Examiner's statement (answer, top of page 10) that Spencer's "circuit breaker will trip when the current exceeds a predetermined maximum allowable current value 'for a specified period of time'" confirms this time period measurement. We find that Spencer does not meet the claim 13 limitation as discussed supra. Turning to the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claim 1, we find 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 claimed invention by the reasonable teachings or suggestions found in the prior art, or by a reasonable inference to the artisan contained in such teachings or suggestions. In re Sernaker, 702 F.2d 989, 995, 217 USPQ 1, 6 (Fed. Cir. 1983). Claim 1 recites "current sensing means sensing current flowing in said electrical system" and "event signal 7Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007