Appeal No. 2003-0715
Application No. 09/873,806
prior art that support the examiner’s determination of
obviousness. In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 426, 208 USPQ 871, 882
(CCPA 1981)(“[O]ne cannot show non-obviousness by attacking
references individually where, as here, the rejections are based
on combinations of references.”).
For these reasons, we uphold this ground of rejection as
well.
Summary
In summary, we affirm the examiner’s 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
rejections of (i) appealed claims 1 through 6, 9, and 10 as
unpatentable over Ballard and Nagai; and (ii) appealed claims 7
and 8 as unpatentable over Ballard, Nagai, and Kubota.
The decision of the examiner is affirmed.
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007