Appeal No.2003-0078 Page 10
Application No.09/257,066
as to be reasonably guaranteed as attainable through practicing
the invention as broadly claimed.
Having reconsidered all of the evidence of record proffered
by the examiner and appellants, we have determined that the
evidence of obviousness, on balance, outweighs the evidence of
nonobviousness. Hence, we conclude that the claimed subject
matter as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art. Accordingly, we affirm the examiner’s § 103
rejection over the Falk patents.
Falk ‘967 or Falk ‘286 in view of Wirtz
Concerning the examiner’s rejection of claim 18, appellants
do not specifically argue the combination of either Falk patent
with Wirtz as to establishing the obviousness of using butyl
diglycol in the composition of either Falk patent. Rather,
appellants argue for the patentability of dependent claim 18
based on their arguments for the patentability of independent
claim 1. It follows that we shall sustain the examiner’s
rejection of claim 18 for the reasons discussed above.
Barbarin in view of Falk ‘967 and Pennartz
We agree with the examiner that the combination of Barbarin,
Falk and Pennartz establish the prima facie obviousness of the
subject matter of representative claim 1 and separately argued
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007