Appeal No. 2005-1271
Application No. 09/922,376
would be inoperative, the examiner properly sets forth that
"[t]he test for obviousness is not whether the features of a
secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure
of the primary reference" (page 6 of Answer, last paragraph).
In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425, 208 USPQ 871, 881 (CCPA 1981).
Concerning the § 103 rejection of claims 5 and 13 over
Deshaies in view of Huettner, we are convinced that it would have
been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate
a noise maker into the device of Deshaies. Indeed, as
acknowledged at page 1 of appellant's specification, it was known
in the art to provide a noise maker, such as a bell, inside an
edible toy for a dog.
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 and the reasons well-
stated by the examiner, the examiner's decision rejecting the
appealed claims is affirmed.
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007