Appeal No. 96-2953
Application 08/258,565
Claims 22, 24 and 25 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Ikeuchi in view of Katayama
in further view of Muraoka and Ichikawa and further view of
Barber. Rather than reiterate the arguments of
Appellants and the Examiner, reference is made to the brief
and answer for the respective details thereof.
OPINION
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 1, 2, 3,
6, 8, 9 and 26 through 30 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b), nor the
rejection of claims 7, 10 through 19, 22, 24 and 25 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 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).
"Additionally, when determining obviousness, the claimed
invention should be considered as a whole; there is no legally
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007