Appeal No. 2006-1588
Application No. 10/707,526
receptacle. Consequently, there is no need for Shadduck’s
sloping tongues (36). Also, the examiner has not established
that the applied references would have fairly suggested, to one
of ordinary skill in the art, using Leo’s apparatus to slice and
dice materials which do not conform to the shape of the
receptacle.
For the above reasons we conclude that the examiner has not
established a prima facie case of obviousness over Leo in view of
Shadduck of the invention claimed in the appellants’ claims 8, 9,
14, 18 and 19.
DECISION
The rejection of claims 1, 6 and 7 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
over Leo is affirmed and the rejection of claims 8, 9, 14, 18 and
19 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Leo in view of Shadduck is
reversed.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007