Appeal No. 1996-4073 Application No. 08/345,917 Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the Examiner, reference is made to the brief and answer for the respective details thereof. OPINION After a careful review of the evidence before us, we will not sustain the rejection of claims 31 through 33 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 recognizable 'heart' of the 5Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007