Appeal No. 2005-1003 Application No. 09/967,249 As a final point, we note that appellants base no argument upon objective evidence of nonobviousness, such as unexpected results, which would serve to rebut the prima facie case of obviousness established by the examiner. In conclusion, based on the foregoing and the reasons well- stated by the examiner, 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 § 1.136(a)(1)(iv) (effective Sep. 13, 2004; 69 Fed. Reg. 49960 (Aug. 12, 2004); 1286 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 21 (Sep. 7, 2004)). AFFIRMED EDWARD C. KIMLIN ) Administrative Patent Judge ) ) ) ) ) TERRY J. OWENS ) BOARD OF PATENT Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND ) INTERFERENCES ) ) ) BEVERLY PAWLIKOWSKI ) Administrative Patent Judge ) ECK:clm -6-Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007