Appeal No. 2000-0496
Serial No. 08/795,626
argument is not applicable to the JP ‘212 welding fume passage
having toothed ruggedness because, as discussed above, relatively
heavy welding fumes accumulate and are captured in the recessed
parts of the toothed ruggedness.
For the above reasons we conclude that the appellants’
claimed invention would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art over the prior art applied by the examiner.
DECISION
The rejection of claims 3-7 and 10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
over the combined teachings of JP ‘212, Vross and Ray is
affirmed. This affirmance is denominated as involving a new
ground of rejection under 37 CFR § 1.196(b).
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.”
37 CFR § 1.196(b) also provides that the appellant, WITHIN
TWO MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THE DECISION, must exercise one of
the following two options with respect to the new ground of
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007