Appeal No. 1998-0341
Application No. 08/476,293
OPINION
After a careful review of the evidence before us, we will
not sustain the rejection of claims 11 through 18 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 legally
recognizable 'heart' of the invention." Para-Ordnance Mfg.,
Inc. v. SGS Importers Int’l, Inc., 73 F.3d 1085, 1087, 37
USPQ2d 1237, 1239 (Fed. Cir. 1995), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct.
80 (1996) (citing W. L. Gore & Assocs., Inc. v. Garlock, Inc.,
721 F.2d 1540, 1548, 220 USPQ 303, 309 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert.
denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984)).
With regard to the rejection of claim 11, the Examiner
-6-6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007