Appeal No. 2006-3122
Application No. 10/247,769
evidence or arguments that persuasively rebut the examiner's prima facie case.
Appellants did not persuasively rebut the examiner's prima facie case of
obviousness, but merely noted that the dependent claims are patentable since
they depend from patentable independent claims [brief, page 10]. The rejection
is therefore sustained.
In summary, we have sustained the examiner's rejection with respect to all
claims on appeal. Therefore, the decision of the examiner rejecting claims 1-9
and 14-31 is affirmed.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013