Appeal 2007-2566
Application 10/243,873
pleasing. Appellants have not pointed to any evidence of record establishing
that one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that a dental pin
comprising a composite of radio-opaque fibers embedded in a resin matrix
would necessarily not be visible through a dental restorative, particularly
where the composite is open to inclusion of other materials. In short, the
Examiner has provided a reason for making the combination, which we find
credible and which Appellants have not substantively challenged, i.e., "to
make an aesthetic restoration . . . as well as aid in diagnostic procedures to
the dentist" (Answer 3). Appellants have not come forward with evidence to
the contrary.
Therefore, based on the foregoing, we affirm the rejections of claims
1-10 under § 103(a).
CONCLUSION
In summary, the decision of the Examiner to reject (i) claims 1 and 2
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over Bachmann in view of Bowen; and,
(ii) claims 3-10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over Bachmann in view
of Bowen and Karmaker is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR § 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013