Appeal No. 1999-2435 3
Application No. 08/872,876
positioning said secondary preform assembly in a specified position with
respect to said furnace.
THE REFERENCE OF RECORD
As evidence of anticipation the examiner relies upon the following reference:
Hicks, Jr. (Hicks) 2,980,957 Apr. 25, 1961
THE REJECTION
Claims 1, 2, 11 and 16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated
by Hicks.
OPINION
We have carefully considered all of the arguments advanced by the appellants and
the examiner, and agree with the appellants that the rejection of the claims is not well
founded. Accordingly, we reverse this rejection.
The Rejection Under Section 103(a)
"[T]he examiner bears the initial burden, on review of the prior art or on any other
ground, of presenting a prima facie case of unpatentability." See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d
1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
As described in the specification, the invention is directed to a “plurality of
passages to provide an inlet for flow of gas, a region in which the flow of gas generates a
condition of reduced pressure, and an extension of the region of reduced pressure to
interior space.” See specification, page 7, lines 8-10. Reference to Figure 6A further
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007