Appeal No. 2006-0501
Application No. 10/131,019
REJECTIONS
The appealed claims stand rejected as follows:
1. Claims 11, 12, 14 and 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a) as
anticipated by the disclosure of Spain;
2. Claims 13 and 15 through 17 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over the disclosure of Spain.
DISCUSSION
We have carefully reviewed the claims, specification and
prior art, including all of the arguments advanced by both the
examiner and the appellants in support of their respective
positions. This review has led us to conclude that the
examiner’s Sections 102(a) and 103(a) rejections are well
founded. Accordingly, we affirm the examiner’s Sections 102(a)
and 103(a) rejections for essentially the factual findings and
conclusions set forth in the Answer. We add the following
primarily for emphasis and completeness.
We find that Spain, like the claimed invention, is directed
to “a process of manufacturing a molded plastic article...with
surface properties meeting criteria for exterior automotive use.”
See column 4, lines 46-50. As pointed out by the examiner (the
Answer, pages 3-6), this process involves providing a carrier
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007