Appeal No. 2004-1302
Application No. 09/789,757
19 depends indirectly from claim 1 calls for the rosette to be
molded of material selected from the group consisting of
elastomeric polymer, polypropylene, nylon, Zylar, or combinations
thereof.
As to the rejection of claims 16 and 19 as being
unpatentable over Cheung, the examiner implicitly acknowledges
that Cheung does not disclose the materials called for in the
claims; however, the examiner maintains (final rejection, page 7)
that (1) their selection would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art based on the selection of a known
material on the basis of its suitability for the intended
purpose, and (2) it would have been obvious to make the tray of
clear material in order to facilitate viewing of the contents
thereof. In response (brief, pages 28 and 29), appellant points
out that Cheung does not disclose the claimed materials, but does
not otherwise dispute or challenge the examiner’s determination
of obviousness.
The examiner’s conclusion of obviousness is reasonable on
its face and has not been specifically challenged by appellant.
Accordingly, as argued, the rejection of claims 16 and 19 as
being unpatentable over Cheung will be sustained.
15
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007