Appeal No. 2004-1099
Application No. 09/868,911
has not presented a convincing reason for the combination of the
different methods of JP ‘118 and JP ‘811.
The examiner has applied JP ‘118 as the sole reference for the
teaching of providing a cooling apparatus or cooling step in every
rejection on appeal (see the Answer in its entirety). The
remaining secondary references (JP ‘971 and Bauer) and primary
reference (Derwent ‘045A) do not remedy the deficiencies in JP ‘118
discussed above. For the foregoing reasons and those stated in the
Brief, we determine that the examiner has not established a prima
facie case of obviousness in view of the reference evidence of
record. Therefore we cannot sustain any rejection on appeal.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007