Appeal No. 2006-2811 Page 10
Application No. 09/973,646
claim 1. Furthermore, the examiner has not set forth a prima facie case that claim 1, or
a molded article made from it, with or without the additional component recited in
claims 16-19, would have been obvious over Gallucci alone. Thus, the examiner has
not set forth a prima facie case that claims 16-19 would have been obvious over
Gallucci alone. We therefore reverse the obviousness rejection of these claims.
Summary
Appellants have adequately shown that the relevant disclosure in Sakaki was
derived from their own work and that they reduced to practice the invention of claims 1,
3-7, and 12 before the effective filing date of Gallucci. The examiner has not shown that
the remaining claims were anticipated or would have been obvious to a person of
ordinary skill in the art based on Gallucci alone. We therefore reverse the rejections on
appeal.
REVERSED
Eric Grimes )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
Nancy J. Linck )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
)
Richard M. Lebovitz )
Administrative Patent Judge )
EG/MLM/hs
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013