Appeal 2006-2614
Application 10/610,605
§ 103(a) Rejection over Everaerts, Zhao and Topolkaraev
Appellants contest this rejection primarily on the basis of the claimed
macrophotoinitiator not being taught or suggested by the applied references
for substantially the reasons advanced against the Examiner’s rejection of
claims 1-13 (Br. 5-6). In this regard, Appellants’ generalized assertion of
picking and choosing does not address, with any particularity, the
Examiner’s finding of motivation based on an asserted increased melt
strength (Br. 6; Answer 5). For the reasons advanced above, it follows that
we shall also affirm the Examiner’s obviousness rejection of claims 14-25
over Everaerts, Zhao and Topolkaraev.
ORDER
The Examiner’s decision to reject claims 1-13 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Everaerts in view of Zhao and to reject
claims 14-25 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Everaerts
in view of Zhao and Topolkaraev is affirmed.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013