Appeal 2006-2358
Application 09/817,573
Claim 4 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) over the combined
teachings of Wolf, Biggs, and Haas. Appellants have not provided
arguments regarding this separate ground of rejection. As such, Appellants
have not challenged the suitability of combining the teachings of the Wolf,
Biggs, and Haas references as proposed by the Examiner (Answer 5). Since
Appellants have failed to substantively challenge the Examiner's basis for
combining the references we affirm the Examiner's rejection for the reasons
presented by the Examiner.
For the foregoing reasons and those set forth in the Answer, we
determine that the Examiner has established a prima facie case of
unpatentability under § 103, which has not been adequately rebutted by
Appellants. Accordingly, the Examiner's rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103
are affirmed.
CONCLUSION
The rejections of claims 1-3 and 5-6 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
obvious over Wolf and Biggs and claim 4 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over the
combined teachings of Wolf, Biggs, and Haas have been affirmed.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013