Appeal No. 1996-3768 Page 8
Application No. 08/292,887
Based upon the above analysis, we have determined that the
examiner’s legal conclusion of obviousness is not supported by
the facts. “Where the legal conclusion [of obviousness] is not
supported by the facts it cannot stand.” In re Warner, 379
F.2d 1011, 1017, 154 USPQ 173, 178 (CCPA 1967).
As to claims 25 and 33, on the record before us appellants
have presented no arguments specific to either claim 25 or 33.
The limitations of “expansion properties on the order of 300%”
and a “rigid adhesive is no greater than 75% by weight of the
composite adhesive,” which are the basis for appellants’
argument for patentability throughout the Brief, are not found
in either claim 25 or 33. Accordingly, we affirm the
examiner’s rejection as to those claims.
The Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112.
Appellants have not argued in the record before us the
propriety of the examiner’s rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
paragraph two. Accordingly, we are constrained to summarily
sustain it.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007