Appeal No. 2003-0505 Page 7
Application No. 08/527,679
at a distance from one another at interspaces which lie in the range from their diameter up to
three times their diameter.”
As a final point, we note that Appellants base no arguments upon objective evidence of
non-obviousness such as unexpected results. We conclude that the Examiner has established a
prima facie case of obviousness with respect to the subject matter of claims 1, 3, 6, and 7 which
has not been sufficiently rebutted by Appellant.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the Examiner to reject claims 1, 3, 6, and 7 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is affirmed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007