Appeal 2007-2582
Application 10/800,652
Appellants also contend that the proffered combination of Sinopoli
and Lau would lead one of ordinary skill in the art to plug an appliance with
a releasable cord into one of the electrical receptacles of the Sinopoli
apparatus and would not lead to the claimed invention. While such a
combination could be contemplated, it does not negate the combination
provided in the rejection.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
We conclude that Appellants have not shown that the Examiner erred
in rejecting claims 1, 2, 5, 6 and 11 and we affirm the Examiner’s rejection
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Sinopoli and Lau.
Appellants have chosen not to address the Examiner’s rejections of
claims 4 and 7 through 10. (Br.4). Thus, we affirm the Examiner’s rejection
of these claims pro forma.
DECISION
The decision of the Examiner is affirmed.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013