Appeal No. 2001-2347
Application No. 08/251,574
Claims 1, 3-4 and 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over
Huston or Rodwell in view of White or Shultz and in further view of Zimmerman,
Houston or Hudziak.
We affirm.
DISCUSSION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
the appellants' specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellants regarding the above-noted rejection, we make reference to the
Examiner's Answer for the examiner=s complete reasoning in support of the rejection,
and to the appellants' Brief for the appellants' arguments thereagainst. As a
consequence of our review, we make the determinations which follow.
35 U.S.C. ' 103
Claims 1, 3-4 and 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over
Huston or Rodwell in view of White or Shultz and in further view of Zimmerman,
Houston or Hudziak.
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the examiner bears the initial burden
of presenting a prima facie case of obviousness. See In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531,
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007