Ex parte MELLO et al. - Page 12

          Appeal No. 95-2655                                                          
          Application 07/912,029                                                      

               For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that the subject                
          matter of claims 1 to 20 would have been prima facie obvious                
          based on the disclosure and teachings found in the Abstract                 
          and Yamamoto.  We also conclude that appellants have not                    
          presented objective evidence of nonobviousness, on this                     
          record, which would serve to rebut the prima facie case.                    
          Accordingly, the examiner’s rejection of claims 1 to 20 under               
          35 U.S.C.  103 as unpatentable over the Abstract is affirmed.              
          However, since we have elaborated on the reasoning of the                   
          examiner and referred to the translation of the Japanese                    
          reference and Gasser that was the basis of the abstract, we                 
          denominate this “affirmance” as a new ground of rejection                   
          pursuant to our authority under 37 CFR  1.196(b).                          
               Any request for reconsideration or modification of this                
          decision by the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences                   
          based upon the same record must be filed within one month from              
          the date of the decision.  37 CFR  1.197.  Should appellants               
          elect to have further prosecution before the examiner in                    
          response to the new rejection under 37 CFR  1.196(b) by way                
          of amendment or showing of facts, or both, not previously of                


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007