Ex Parte Kretchman et al - Page 4




          Appeal No. 2003-1754                                                        
          Application No. 09/821,137                                 Page 4           


               The prior art references of record relied upon by the                  
          examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:                              
          Kaiser, Pasta, Pies and Pastries, “Tart Recipes from around the             
          World” , pp. 2, 7-9, 11, 30, 43, 48, 115 and 116, cover pages, an           
          unnumbered page entitled “About the Author”, two unnumbered pages           
          illustrating devices, and a “Table of Contents” page (no                    
          publication date provided).1                                                
          Shideler, “Ways to Make it Through the First Day of School,”                
          Wichita Eagle, Living Section, page 1c, Aug. 14, 1994.                      
               Claims 45-54 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as                
          being unpatentable over Kaiser in view of Shideler.                         
               We refer to the briefs and to the answer for a complete                
          exposition of the opposing viewpoints expressed by appellants and           
          the examiner concerning the issues before us on this appeal.                
                                       OPINION                                        
               Having carefully considered each of appellants* arguments              
          and the evidence in support thereof as set forth in the brief and           
          reply brief, appellants have not persuaded us of reversible error           
          on the part of the examiner.  Accordingly, we will affirm the               
          examiner’s rejection for substantially the reasons set forth by             
          the examiner in the answer.  We add the following for emphasis.             


               1 Appellants do not dispute the examiner’s finding that the            
          excerpts from Kaiser, which were submitted by appellants,                   
          represent prior art to the here claimed invention.  See page 3 of           
          the examiner’s answer and item No. 4 of Paper No. 6.                        







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007