Appeal No. 2004-2028
Application No. 09/423,746
appellants do not compare the closest prior art with the claimed
invention.
Thus, on this record, we determine that the evidence of
obviousness, on balance, outweighs the evidence of nonobviousness
proffered by the appellants. Hence, we concur with the examiner
that the claimed subject matter as a whole would have been obvious
to one of ordinary skill in the art within the meaning of 35 U.S.C.
§ 103. Accordingly, we affirm the examiner’s decision rejecting
claims 1, 2, 4 through 10, 12 and 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over the combined disclosures of Regler and Fagiolini
‘835.
CONCLUSION
In view of the foregoing, the decision of the examiner is
affirmed.
15
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007