Appeal No. 1997-0424
Application 07/985,253
Masubuchi et al. (Masubuchi) 4,888,244 Dec. 19,
1989
Claims 1 to 5 and 7 to 13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 over Takahashi and Masubuchi.
Reference is made to Appellants’ briefs and the 3
Examiner's answer for their respective positions.
OPINION
We have considered the record before us, and we will
reverse the rejection of claims 1 to 5 and 7 to 13.
With respect to claims 1 to 5 and 7 to 13, the Examiner
has failed to set forth a prima facie case of obviousness. 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
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 considered as a
3A reply brief was filed on Oct. 1, 1996 and was entered
in the record on Oct. 31, 1996 without any response by the
Examiner.
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007