Appeal No. 2004-0085
Application No. 09/876,447
We agree with the examiner’s conclusion of obviousness for
the reasons expressed in the Answer. The appellants have given
no basis for a contrary conclusion other than their argument that
the primary reference is deficient and that Laursen lends no
additional weight in the §103(a) rejection. As we have already
found the Koos primary reference is not deficient with respect to
the §102(b) rejection, we cannot agree with the appellants. We
therefore sustain the §103(a) rejection of claim 8 as being
unpatentable over Koos in view of Laursen.
SUMMARY
The decision of the Examiner is affirmed.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007