Appeal Number 2006-2869
Application No. 10/385,520
Aller,105 USPQ 233, 235, 220 F.2d 454, 456 (C.C.PA. 1955) to be misplaced, as correctly noted
by appellants (reply brief, page 5). In In re Aller, 105 USPQ at 235, the general concept and
ranges were disclosed, and the particular ranges were at issue. As noted supra, we have no
disclosure of any ranges or dimensions in Perry, but merely a disclosure of a gas burner. Thus,
we do not agree with the examiner (answer, page 5) that there was no criticality for the specific
ranges and proportions recited in the claims.
From all of the above, we hold that the examiner has failed to establish a prima
facie case of obviousness of claims 1-14. Accordingly, we cannot sustain the rejection of these
claims.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1-14 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
is reversed.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007