Appeal No. 1996-3597 Page 6
Application No. 08/050,825
We note that 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. See In re Sernaker, 702 F.2d 989, 994, 217 USPQ
1, 5 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
The examiner has not adequately explained how a skilled
artisan would have arrived at the claimed invention from the
collective prior art teachings assembled by the examiner even
if all of the references were combinable as alleged. As
indicated above, all of the claims on appeal herein are drawn
to a method requiring at least six specifically enumerated
steps in fashioning a flexible mold structure having a cavity
therein defined by a reverse image of the outer contour of a
model that was used in forming the mold and subsequently
removed therefrom. Indeed, we find the examiner's explanation
(answer, pages 3-7) as to why or how a skilled artisan would
have been led to modify the method of forming a block burner
of Frahme and the protective hand covering manufacturing
method of Adiletta to arrive at the claimed method herein with
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007