Appeal No. 98-0599
Application 08/434,029
simply has not sufficiently developed the argument by
reference to the underlying evidence for it to be persuasive.
Note also that Kato specifically describes that the plastic
base material for forming the control ring 19 “can be selected
mainly from thermoplastic resins such as polyacetal, nylon,
polybutylene terephthalate, polyester, polypropylene,
polyethylene, polyfluroethylene, etc.” The appellant has made
no explanation as to why polycarbonate resin does not fall
within this class of thermoplastic material.
The rejection of claim 35
We reverse the rejection of claim 35. A reversal of the
rejection on appeal should not be construed as an affirmative
indication that the appellant’s claims are patentable over
prior art. We address only the positions and rationale as set
forth by the examiner and on which the examiner’s rejection of
the claims on appeal is based.
Claim 35 depends from claim 31 and further specifies a
cartridge rib projecting from the second cartridge surface
towards the second surface of the substrate and being formed
around the central aperture. The claim specifies that the
14
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007