Appeal No. 96-4088
Application 08/317,411
Claims 1 through 8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Sze in view of Chin.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellant 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
through 8 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 express teachings or suggestions
found in the prior 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
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007