Appeal No. 96-1165
Application 08/060,422
Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the examiner’s rejection of claims 8 and 32 over the
combined teachings of Gorin, Kertamus and Wheelock and affirm the rejection of claims 1-7, 9-31 and
33-35 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious over the same references. We conclude that the combined
teachings of Gorin, Kertamus and Wheelock establish a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed
subject matter set forth in claims 1-7, 9-31 and 33-35 and that appellant has not presented any objective
evidence or sufficient arguments to rebut the prima facie case. In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28
USPQ2d 1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Piasecki, 745 F.2d 1468, 1471-73, 223 USPQ 785, 787-
88 (Fed. Cir. 1984); In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1051, 189 USPQ 143, 147 (CCPA 1976).
Accordingly, the decision of the examiner is affirmed-in-part.
-13-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007