Appeal No. 2005-0424
Application No. 09/873,845
that the image on the surface of the inner globe is visible from
outside the outer cover by viewing the inner globe through the
outer cover. This aspect of the apparatus is also fairly taught
by Farquhar. Hence, it can be seen that appellant's arguments
are not commensurate in scope to the degree of protection sought
by the appealed claims.
As for separately rejected claim 3, appellant does not
present a separate substantive argument but, rather, relies upon
the arguments advanced for claim 1 (see page 9 of principal
brief, last paragraph).
As a final point, we note that appellant bases no argument
upon objective evidence of nonobviousness, such as unexpected
results.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing, the examiner's
decision rejecting the appealed claims is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007