Appeal No. 2003-0755
Application No. 09/190,993
Claims 14-24, all of the appealed claims, stand finally
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). As evidence of obviousness, the
Examiner offers Williams in view of Teicher with respect to claims
14-22, and adds Biffar to the basic combination with respect to
claims 23 and 24.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the
Examiner, reference is made to the Brief (Paper No. 20) and the
Answer (Paper No. 21) for the respective details.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on appeal, the
rejection advanced by the Examiner, the arguments in support of the
rejection, and the evidence of obviousness relied upon by the
Examiner as support for the rejection. We have, likewise, reviewed
and taken into consideration, in reaching our decision, Appellants’
arguments set forth in the Brief along with the Examiner’s
rationale in support of the rejection and arguments in rebuttal set
forth in the Examiner’s Answer.
It is our view, after consideration of the record before us,
that the evidence relied upon and the level of skill in the
particular art would have suggested to one of ordinary skill in the
art the obviousness of the invention as set forth in claims 14-24.
Accordingly, we affirm.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007