Appeal No. 1997-0800
Application No. 08/382,926
a terminal disclaimer.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellant and
the Examiner, reference is made to the brief and answer for
the respective details thereof.
OPINION
After a careful review of the evidence before us, we
will not sustain the rejection of claims 21 through 30 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 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). "Additionally, when determining obviousness, the
claimed invention should be considered as a whole; there is no
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007