Appeal No. 1996-2853
Application 08/375,272
Claims 21, 22, 24, 25 and 27 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Arakawa and under 35
U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuchino. 2
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the
Examiner, reference is made to the brief, reply brief and
answer for the respective details thereof.
OPINION3
After a careful review of the evidence before us, we
will not sustain the rejection of claims 21, 22, 24, 25 and 27
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 claimed
2These rejections are stated as new grounds of rejection in the Answer,
but had been made against the dependent claims (23,26 and 29) which were
canceled in the amendment after final rejection, Paper No. 37. At the same
time, the subject matter of these canceled claims was added to the respective
independent claims, necessitating the rejection change.
3As a preliminary matter, Appellants had indicated in their brief that
the Board would be updated on any related appeals and interferences after a
completion of reviewing their files. At oral hearing Appellants indicated that
no related appeals or interferences had been found.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007