Appeal No. 2003-0695 Page 7
Application No. 09/732,014
examiner describe or teach making an article from the same
materials in substantially the same way as appellants’
representative claim requires. Since the U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office does not have the facilities to make and compare
products, it is appropriate to shift the burden of producing
evidence in rebuttal to appellants to establish that products
made from copolymers of propylene and hexene in a manner as
taught by the applied references do not possess the claimed
characteristics if such is the case.
Appellants have not satisfied that burden of producing
evidence in rebuttal. Nor have appellants furnished any other
persuasive arguments in the briefs with regard to the separate
rejections advanced by the examiner for the reasons outlined by
the examiner in the answer and above. Thus, on this record, we
shall sustain the examiner’s rejections.
CONCLUSION
The decision of the examiner to reject claims 16, 36, 38-45,
47-49, 51-58, 60 and 61 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being
anticipated by McAlpin; to reject claims 16, 36, 38-45, 47-49,
51-58, 60 and 61 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007