Ex parte TAMURA - Page 11




              Appeal No. 1996-0111                                                                                          
              Application 08/041,428                                                                                        


              serum marker is used as an diagnostic tool for evaluating the health of animals within the                    
              group in order to permit the treatment of the animals identified as having a diseased                         
              condition.   On this record, the examiner's reasoning, supported by the facts and evidence                    
              presented, are sufficient to establish a prima facie case of unpatentability as to the                        
              claimed subject matter.                                                                                       
                     Having weighed appellant's arguments and evidence against the evidence in favor                        
              of unpatentability, we agree with the examiner's determination that Tamura I, Tamura II and                   
              Itoh are sufficient to establish a prima facie case of unpatentability as to the claimed                      
              subject matter which is not overcome by either arguments or convincing evidence.  We,                         
              therefore, affirm the rejection of claims 25-26 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.                                        
                                                        Summary                                                             

                     The rejection of claims 1-26 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over the combination of                             
              Fudenberg, Toyama, Shell, Ruhenstroth-Bauer, and Belpaire is reversed.  The                                   






              rejection of claims 25-26 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over the combination of Tamura I, Tamura                      
              II, and Itoh is affirmed.                                                                                     
                     No period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be                       
              extended under 37 CFR § 1.136(a).                                                                             
                                                            11                                                              





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007