Ex parte KOMODA - Page 5




          Appeal No. 1998-0493                                                        
          Application 08/364,000                                                      


                    After a careful review of the evidence before us, we              
          will not sustain the rejection of claims 1 through 6 under                  
          35 U.S.C. § 103.                                                            
                    At the outset, we note that Appellant has indicated               
          on page 4 of the brief all claims stand or fall together with               
          claim 1.                                                                    





                    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. v.              
          SGS Importers Int’l, Inc., 73 F.3d 1085, 1087, 37 USPQ2d 1237,              

                                          5                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007