Appeal No. 2004-0052
Application No. 09/180,432
appellants’ method of preparation (Answer, pages 3-4).
Accordingly, it would have been reasonable to one of ordinary skill
in this art that the only remaining claim limitation found in claim
1 on appeal (“non-galvanic corrosive”) would have been present in
the carbon fibers and composite of McCullough and Otani. See In re
Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
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, we affirm the examiner’s rejection of claims
1-10 and 15-42 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over McCullough in view of
Otani.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007