Appeal 2007-0734
Application 09/908,455
displaced upon convergence of the liquid droplets. The claimed subject
matter requires the air/gas to be expelled. This does not prevent the air/gas
from being removed through the template.
The rejection of claims 159-162, 174, 178, and 179 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(e) as anticipated by Nebashi is affirmed.
Claims 163, 164, 175, 180, and 181 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103(a) as obvious over Nebashi. We affirm.
Appellants rely on the same arguments presented in the discussion of
the rejection under §102 over Nebashi (Br. 10).
Appellants’ arguments are not persuasive for the reasons set forth
above and in the Examiner's Answer (Answer 9-10). The Examiner has
explained why it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in
the art to modify the viscosity of the liquid in Nebashi. The Appellants have
failed to challenge the Examiner's position.
DECISION
The Examiner’s rejection of claims 150-156, 159-162, 165-171, 174,
175, 178, and 179 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as anticipated by Donges has
been affirmed.
The Examiner’s rejection of claims 157, 158, 163, 164, 172, 173, 180,
and 181 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over Donges has been
affirmed.
The Examiner’s rejection of claims 159-162, 174, 178, and 179 under
35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as anticipated by Nebashi has been affirmed.
The Examiner’s rejection of claims 163, 164, 175, 180, and 181 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over Nebashi has been affirmed.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013