Appeal No. 2004-0507
Application No. 09/476,862
least satisfied the burden of presenting a prima facie case of
obviousness. The burden is, therefore, upon Appellant to come
forward with evidence and/or arguments which persuasively rebut
the Examiner’s prima facie case of obviousness. Only those
arguments actually made by Appellant have been considered in this
decision. Arguments which Appellant could have made but chose
not to make in the Briefs have not been considered and are deemed
to be waived (see 37 CFR § 41.37(c)(1)(vii)).
Appellant’s arguments in response to the obviousness
rejection of claim 7 based on the combination of Shinada and
Landry assert that the Examiner has failed to establish a prima
facie case of obviousness since all of the claimed limitations
are not taught or suggested by the applied prior art references.
After careful review of the applied Shinada and Landry references
in light of the arguments of record, we find Appellant’s
assertions to be unpersuasive.
Initially, Appellant contends (Brief, page 4; Reply Brief,
pages 3 and 4) that, unlike the claimed invention, the recording
system of Shinada is not directed to a non-erasable, write-once
disk (CD-R). It is apparent to us, however, from the language of
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007