Appeal No. 2000-1765
Application No. 08/947,895
Rejections at Issue
Claims 1 and 24 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Appellants' admitted prior art of Figure
1 and Araki.
OPINION
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 1 and 24 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. See In re Sernaker, 702 F.2d
989, 995, 217 USPQ 1, 6 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
Appellants argue that Araki relates to an automatic
balancing device for a rotary body in an imbalanced state, such
as a rotary injection type metal powder manufacturing apparatus.
See Appeal Brief, page 9, lines 6-8. Appellants argue that Araki
does not relate to a disk player and there is no recognition of
compensating for vibrations due to an eccentric center of gravity
of a disk which is clamped in place on a turntable of a disk
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007