Appeal No. 1997-0758
Application No. 08/140,658
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants
and the Examiner, reference is made to the brief, reply brief,
answer and supplemental answer for the respective details
thereof.
OPINION
After a careful review of the evidence before us, we
will not sustain the rejection of claims 1 through 19 under 35
U.S.C. § 103.
At the outset, we note that Appellants have
indicated on page 3 of the brief that all claims stand or fall
together. The Examiner agrees, answer-page 2.
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).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007