Appeal No. 2006-1652
Application No. 10/011,583
examiner, and the examiner has not responded to the appellant’s
argument.
Accordingly, we conclude that the examiner has not
established a prima facie case of obviousness of the appellant’s
claimed invention.1
1 The examiner does not rely upon Imran for any reason to combine Chu and
Guenther or for a disclosure of the subject matter for which the examiner
relies upon Chu and Guenther.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007