Appeal No. 2006-0041 12
Application No. 10/037,377
the Examiner has established a prima facie case of obviousness
with respect to the subject matter of claims 8-10 and 22-24 which
has not been sufficiently rebutted by Appellant.
3. Rejection of Claim 14 over Molnlycke and Lassen, and
further in combination of Houghton and Richardson.
To reject claim 14, the Examiner added Houghton and
Richardson as further evidence of obviousness. Again, Appellant
presents no new argument over and above what we have already
addressed. We conclude that the Examiner has established a prima
facie case of obviousness with respect to the subject matter of
claim 14 which has not been sufficiently rebutted by Appellant.
Based upon a review of the totality of the evidence of
record with due consideration of the arguments advanced by the
Appellant, we conclude that a preponderance of the evidence
supports a legal conclusion of obviousness within the meaning of
35 U.S.C. § 103(a). We therefore affirm the decision of the
Examiner to reject the claims as obvious.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007