Appeal No. 2004-1332
Application No. 10/010,691
For the reasons set forth above and in the answer, it is our
determination that the Examiner has established a prima facie case
of obviousness which the Appellant has failed to successfully rebut
with argument and/or evidence of nonobviousness. See In re
Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir.
1992). We shall sustain, therefore, the Examiner’s § 103 rejection
of claims 1-13 as being unpatentable over Houlihan in view of
Barrett.
The decision of the Examiner is affirmed.
77
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007