Appeal No. 2004-2324
Application No. 10/226,852
Appealed claims 1-55 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Hale in view of Nesbitt. Claims 1-55
also stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Loshigian in view of Nesbitt.
Appellant submits at page 4 of the Brief that "[a]ll pending
claims may be grouped together." Since appellant has not
contested the examiner's determination that claims 1-55 stand or
fall together, we will treat all the appealed claims as standing
or falling with claim 1.
We have thoroughly reviewed each of appellant's arguments
for patentability. However, we are in complete agreement with
the examiner that the claimed subject matter would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art within the meaning of
§ 103 in view of the applied prior art. Accordingly, we will
sustain the examiner's rejections for essentially those reasons
expressed in the Answer, and we add the following primarily for
emphasis.
We consider first the examiner's rejection of all the
appealed claims over Hale in view of Nesbitt. There is no
dispute that Hale, like appellant, discloses a marine fairing
made from polyurethane material. As acknowledged by the
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007