Appeal No. 96-0663
Application No. 08/253,618
wherein the examiner states that he “believes the rejections
should be maintained based solely on the rejections themselves as
provided above.”
We do not necessarily maintain that no prima facie case of
obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 or obviousness-type double
patenting of the instant claimed subject matter can be made in
view of the disclosures of the applied references, only that the
examiner has not done so.
Since the examiner has clearly fallen far short of making
out a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed subject
matter by failing to address the specific steps of the claimed
methods, we will not sustain either the rejection of claims 14,
17 and 18 under 35 U.S.C. 103 or the rejection of these claims
under obviousness-type double patenting.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007