Appeal No. 2000-0335
Application No. 08/780,551 Page 17
with Kotz. We begin with claims 3, 4, 6, 9 and 11, all of which
depend from claims 1 or 7. We reverse the rejection of these
claims because Kotz does not make up for the basic deficiencies
of Fujii with respect to independent claims 1 and 7.
We turn next to claim 20. The examiner's position (final
rejection, page 5) is that Kotz "teach[es] an equation which
expresses the force which is applied to the toner which is
analogous to 'Q' or 'coulomb' which is recited in claim 20. The
examiner asserts (id.) that the equation recited in claim 20
would have been obvious through routine experimentation since the
equation "is innately a characteristic of all particles subjected
to an electric field." Appellants have not provided any
arguments with respect to claim 20, and have grouped (brief, page
3) claim 20 with claim 13, from which claim 20 depends. We
therefore find that the examiner's prima facie case of
obviousness of claim 20 has not been rebutted by appellants.
Accordingly, the rejection of claim 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is
affirmed.
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007