Appeal No. 1998-0995
Application 08/387,298
Claims 6 and 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Bianco.
Claims 15 through 17, 20 and 21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Bianco in view of Palmer.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellant and the Examiner, reference is
1
made to the briefs and answer for the respective details thereof.
OPINION
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 6, 10, 15 through 17, 20 and 21 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 express teachings or suggestions found in the prior art, or by
implications 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’
The Appellant filed an appeal brief on May 23, 1997, and filed a reply brief on October 29, 1997.1
The Examiner mailed an Office communication on February 2, 1998 stating that the reply brief had been
received and entered into the file.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007