Appeal No. 2000-2154
Application 09/136,761
was incumbent on the examiner to cite a reference or
references showing such facts, but the examiner has not done 6
so.
Rejection Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.196(b)
Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.196(b), claims 7 to 9 are rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Mdller in view
of Kirk-Othmer.
As noted previously, Mdller discloses that the abrasive
on grinding wheel 56 may be cubic boron nitride. Kirk-Othmer
3
discloses at pages 25 and 26 both diamond grit and cubic boron
nitride as known abrasives. With regard to claims 8 and 9, it
would have been obvious to use diamond grit instead of cubic
boron nitride as the abrasive for use on Mdller’s grinding
wheel, this being merely the selection of one known abrasive
in place of another depending on their known characteristics,
cost, and other factors. As for claims 7 and 9, which recite
a grit size of 150, Kirk-Othmer shows at page 27 that abrasive
6See MPEP § 2144.03 and Barry, Did You Ever Notice?
Official Notice in Rejections, 81 JPTOS 129, 138 (Feb. 1999).
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007