Appeal No. 1998-2424
Application 08/515,269
Claims 20 and 21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over appellant’s admission of prior art in view
of Fortin.
Claims 20 and 21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over appellant’s admission of prior art in view
of Frew or Boston and Fortin.
Claim 22 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over Fortin or Boston.
OPINION
We have carefully reviewed the rejections on appeal in
light of the arguments of the appellant and the examiner. As
a result of this review, we have come to the determination
that the applied prior art establishes the prima facie
obviousness of claims 20 and 22. This prima facie case of
obviousness has not been rebutted by additional evidence from
the appellant. Therefore, we will sustain the rejections of
claims 20 and 22. Likewise, we have reached the
determination that claim 21 is not prima facie obvious in view
of the cited prior art. Therefore, the rejection of this
claim is not affirmed. Our reason follows.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007