Appeal No. 2003-1391
Application No. 09/165,772
against the calculated ideal gas law pressure to determine if a
leak has occurred (col. 3, ll. 66-70).
For the foregoing reasons and those stated in the Answer, we
determine that the examiner has established a prima facie case of
obviousness in view of the reference evidence. Based on the
totality of the record, including due consideration of appellants’
arguments, we determine that the preponderance of evidence weighs
most heavily in favor of obviousness within the meaning of section
103(a). Accordingly, the rejection of claim 1 on appeal, and
claims 2, 3 and 17 which stand or fall with claim 1, under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) over Basile is affirmed.
OTHER ISSUE
In the event of further or continuing prosecution before the
examiner, the examiner and appellants should consider the
patentability of the claimed subject matter with respect to the
issue of the judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double
patenting in view of the commonly-assigned, same inventorship U.S.
Patent No. 6,089,081.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007