Appeal No. 1997-2910
Application 08/421,387
ing obviousness, the claimed invention should be considered as
a whole; there is no legally recognizable 'heart' of the
invention." Para-Ordnance Mfg. v. SGS Importers Int'l, Inc.,
73 F.3d 1085, 1087, 37 USPQ2d 1237, 1239 (Fed. Cir. 1995),
cert. denied, 519 U.S. 822 (1996) citing W. L. Gore & Assoc.,
Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1548, 220 USPQ 303, 309
(Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
Claims 1, 3, 4 and 6 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Rinia. On pages 4 and 5 of
the appeal brief, Appellant argues that Rinia fails to teach
an inner
fin support, an outer fin support, and a single metal fin
material that is accordion-pleated into folds and brazed at
each crease to the inner and outer fin supports as recited in
Appellant's claims.
Upon our review of Rinia, we fail to find that Rinia
teaches or suggests Appellant's claimed inner fin support,
outer fin support, and a single metal fin material that is
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007