Appeal No. 2006-2826 Page 14
Application No. 09/993,907
Weissleder
Claims 34, 36-38, and 69 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as rendered
obvious over Weissleder.
On page 6 of the Answer, the Examiner set forth the grounds of the rejection.
Appellants objected to it for the same reasons given for the claims rejected as
anticipated by Weissleder:
The rejection of these claims for obviousness, as did the rejection for
anticipation, relies on an assertion of inherency supported only by
unfounded speculation. That issue has been discussed at length above.
The above discussed constraints on assertions of inherency apply to
obviousness rejections as well as rejections for anticipation.
Brief, pages 11-12.
Appellants also stated that there was no “support in the references and/or clear
and convincing explanation based on sound scientific reasoning” upon which the
obviousness rejection was based. Id., page 12.
However, we find that the Examiner did explain his rationale for the rejection.
Since we find no flaw in his reasoning, we affirm the rejection for the reasons provided
in our analysis of the rejection over Weissleder under § 102.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007