Appeal No. 1999-2242
Application No. 08/137,056
We find the appellant's argument unpersuasive for the
following reason. The appellant's argument is not based upon
the rejection before us. Claim 12 has been rejected based on
the combined teachings of Yasukawa, Church and Mohiuddin. The
appellant has argued that claim 12 is not rendered obvious
from the individual teachings of Church and Mohiuddin. The
appellant has not provided any argument as to why the
rejection under
35 U.S.C. § 103 before us in this appeal based upon the
combined teachings of Yasukawa, Church and Mohiuddin is in
error. Nonobviousness cannot be established by attacking the
references individually when the rejection is predicated upon
a combination of prior art disclosures. See In re Merck &
Co., Inc., 800 F.2d 1091, 1097, 231 USPQ 375, 380 (Fed. Cir.
1986).
For the reasons set forth above, we will sustain the
examiner’s rejection of claims 12 through 14 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Yasukawa in view of Church
and Mohiuddin.
CONCLUSION
15
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007