Appeal No. 2005-1149
Application No. 09/855,235
16 and 17 (e.g., see pages 11 and 16 of the brief as well as page
3 of the reply brief). These dependent claim features are
expressly disclosed in column 4 of Kawano and column 7 of Maeda,
and the examiner has specifically referred to these reference
disclosures (e.g., see page 4 of the answer wherein the column
4 disclosure of Kawano is discussed and page 6 of the answer
wherein the column 7 disclosure of Maeda is discussed).
In light of the foregoing and for the reasons well expressed
in the answer, it is our determination that the reference
evidence adduced by the examiner establishes a prima facie case
of obviousness which the appellants have failed to successfully
rebut with argument or evidence of nonobviousness. We hereby
sustain, therefore, each of the Section 103 rejections advanced
on this appeal. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445,
24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007