Appeal 2007-0246
Application 09/854,251
sections and pages of Bellare at pages 6-8 of the Answer to further illustrate
the manner in which the prior art is applied. We find that Appellant does not
specifically address the merits of the instant rejection. Since we find that the
Examiner had met the initial burden thereby shifting the burden of
persuasion to Appellant, and Appellant did not clearly and specifically
address those identified teaching in the applied prior art, we will sustain the
rejection of independent claim 1 and those claims grouped therewith by
Appellant.
We find the same deficiency in the arguments presented by Appellant
with respect to independent claims 7 and 19, and we will sustain the
rejection of independent claims 7 and 19 and those claims grouped therewith
by Appellant. Since Appellant has not shown error in the prima facie case of
anticipation, we sustain the rejection of all claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, we have sustained the rejection of claims 1-4, 7-11, 14,
16, and 19-21stand under 35 U.S.C. § 102.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this
appeal may be extended under 37 CFR § 1.136(a).
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013