Appeal No. 96-4197
Application No. 08/425,261
Examiner, reference is made to the brief and answer for the 3
respective details thereof.
OPINION
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 19 through 29
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
3The Examiner mailed a corrected Examiner's answer on
June 26, 1996, which we will refer to simply as the answer.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007