Appeal No. 2002-1551
Application No. 09/286,386
claims stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Hwang in view of Amon.
We consider first the examiner's double patenting rejection.
Although appellants contested this rejection in the principal
brief, appellants informed the Board that "a Terminal Disclaimer
will be filed to disclaim any patent term which extends beyond
the full term of U.S. Patent No. 5,883,043, such that Issue 1 set
forth in the Brief of Appeal will be moot" (page 1 of Reply
Brief). Accordingly, appellants now do not contest the
examiner's double patenting rejection and we, per force, sustain
the examiner's rejection.
We now turn to the examiner's rejection of the appealed
claims under § 103. Having thoroughly reviewed the opposing
positions advanced by appellants and the examiner, we find
ourselves in agreement with appellants that the examiner has not
established a prima facie case of obviousness for the claimed
subject matter. Hwang, the primary reference, is directed to a
particular ink composition that comprises a mixture of infrared
absorptive dyestuffs and an alkaline agent. As appreciated by
the examiner, Hwang does not teach the inclusion of the presently
claimed thermochromic, photochromic and fluorescent pigments and
dyes. To remedy this deficiency, the examiner relies upon Amon
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007