Appeal 2006-1847
Application 10/295,813
The references of record relied upon by the examiner as evidence of
obviousness are:
Chiang 5,332,034 Jul. 26, 1994
Suzuki 5,992,513 Nov. 30, 1999
Bandai JP 57-26394 Feb. 12, 1982
Tsuzaki JP 62 255794 Nov. 07, 1987
Claims 1, 4-7, 9-13 and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Tsuzaki in view of Chiang and Suzuki.
Claim 25 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Tsuzaki in view of Chiang and Suzuki and further in view
of Bandai.
ISSUES
Appellants argue that there is no motivation to combine the teachings
of Chiang and Suzuki with that of Tsuzaki. Appellants further argue that
none of the applied prior art teaches the density of intersecting points or
notches in a range of 90 to 250 intersecting points per square centimeter. On
the other hand, the Examiner argues that the particular parameters claimed in
the independent claims are result effective variables clearly recognized by
the prior art as subject to optimization. Therefore, according to the
Examiner, it would have been obvious for an artisan with ordinary skill to
develop workable or even optimum ranges for these result effective
variables.
Accordingly, the sole issue for our decision is whether the Examiner
has established a prima facie case of obviousness of the claims on appeal.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013