Appeal 2007-1831
Application 10/313,052
Arnold 5,417, 385 May 23, 1995
Burhans 5,542,625 Aug. 06, 1996
Claims 1-4, 9, 13-15 and 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over Arnold in view of Burnelli and Burhans.
Claims 2-4, 10 and 23-24 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over Arnold in view of Burnelli, Burhans and further in view of
Mitchell.
Claims 19-21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable
over Arnold in view of Burnelli, Burhans and further in view of Boyle.
Claims 5-7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over Arnold in view of Burnelli and Burhans and further in
view of Daude.
Claims 8, 11 and 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over Arnold in view of Burnelli, Burhans, Daude and Jupp.
Claims 22 and 25 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over Sigalla, in view of Burnelli, and Burhans, further in view
Daude.
ISSUE
The sole issue provided for our decision on appeal is whether the
examiner has established a prima facie case of obviousness of claims 1-15
and 18-25.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013