Appeal No. 2005-0209
Application 09/274,014
Accordingly, based on our consideration of the totality of the record before us, we have
weighed the evidence of obviousness found in Girot alone and as combined with Davis with
appellants’ countervailing evidence of and argument for nonobviousness and conclude that the
claimed invention encompassed by appealed claims 1 through 22 and 59 through 63 would have
been obvious as a matter of law under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
The examiner’s decision is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be
extended under 37 CFR § 1.136(a)(1)(iv) (effective September 13, 2004; 69 Fed. Reg. 49960
(August 12, 2004); 1286 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 21 (September 7, 2004)).
AFFIRMED
- 12 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007