Appeal No. 2005-0558 Page 6
Application No. 10/280,994
opening in the seed coat of the manufactured seed, as required in
claim 18.
Moreover, if it is the examiner’s view that the lids (274)
of Hartle correspond to “the sheet” set forth in appellant’s
claim 18, then we note that the examiner has not established that
the lids (274) cut from the strip of Parafilm™ M laboratory film
have a predetermined area that is ablated, as required in step
(b) of claim 18.
In light of the foregoing, we find that the examiner has not
established a prima facie case of anticipation with regard to
claim 18, and claims 19 and 20 which depend therefrom, and thus
conclude that the examiner’s rejection of claims 18 through 20
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) based on Hartle will not be sustained.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007