Appeal 2006-2948
Application 10/194,872
of both Appellants' and Bloice's processes. Certainly, it would have been a
matter of obviousness for one of ordinary skill in the art to determine the
specific point in the process when a countermeasure must be employed, and
it would have been within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art to
determine the optimum point in the process for effecting a countermeasure
against the continuous deterioration of the felt's permeability. In re Boesch,
617 F.2d 272, 276, 205 USPQ 215, 219 (CCPA 1980).
As a final point, we note that Appellants base no argument upon
objective evidence of nonobviousness, such as unexpected results, which
would serve to rebut the prima facie case of obviousness established by the
Examiner.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing, the Examiner's decision
rejecting the appealed claims is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR § 1.136(a)(1)(iv) (2004).
AFFIRMED
clj
Todd T. Taylor
Taylor & Aust, P.C.
142 S. Main St.
P.O. Box 560
Avilla, IN 46710
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5
Last modified: November 3, 2007