Appeal No. 1997-3696 Page 10
Application No. 08/473,419
container. Furthermore, the crystallization would progress from the tip of the cone horizontally outward
before progressing vertically upward because the melt in the horizontal direction would be cooler than
the melt above due to the vertical temperature gradient.
We conclude that the examiner has established a prima facie case of obviousness with respect
to the subject matter of claim 65 which has not been sufficiently rebutted by appellant.
CONCLUSION
We reverse the examiner’s rejection of claims 61-64 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. We reverse the
examiner’s rejection of claims 66-68 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b), but enter a new ground rejection. We
affirm the examiner’s rejection of claim 65 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
In addition to affirming the examiner’s rejection of one or more claims, this decision contains a
new ground of rejection pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.196(b)(amended effective Dec. 1 1997, by final rule
notice, 62 Fed. Reg. 53,131, 53,197 (Oct. 10, 1997), 1203 Off. Gaz. Pat. & Trademark Office 63,
122 (Oct. 21, 1997)). 37 CFR § 1.196(b) provides that "[a] new ground of rejection shall not be
considered final for purposes of judicial review."
Regarding any affirmed rejection, 37 CFR § 1.197(b) provides:
(b) Appellants may file a single request for rehearing within two months from
the date of the original decision . . . .
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007