Appeal 2006-2601
Application 10/364,286
d) graphitizing the carbon; and e) creating gems using crystal growth
sublimation.
In addition to the admitted prior art found in Appellant's Specification,
the Examiner relies upon the following references as evidence of
obviousness:
Rieve US 3,454,363 July 8, 1969
Sumiya US 5,908,503 Jun. 1, 1999
Phyllis Gillespie, If You Carat All: Pair Offer to Make Diamonds From
Loved One's Ashes, The Arizona Republic, Aug. 29, 1988 at B1.
Appellant's claimed invention is directed to a synthetic gem made of
elements recovered from human remains by cremation.
Appealed claims 1-4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by Sumiya. Claims 5-41 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Gillespie in view of the admitted prior art.
We have thoroughly reviewed each of Appellant's arguments for
patentability. However, we find that the Examiner's rejections are well-
founded and in accordance with current patent jurisprudence. Accordingly,
we will sustain the Examiner's rejections for the reasons set forth in the
Answer, which we incorporate herein, and we add the following for
emphasis only.
Appellant submits at page 3 of the principal Brief that the following
groups of claims stand or fall together: (I) claims 1 and 2, (II) claims 3 and
4, and (III) claims 5-41.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007