Appeal 2007-0871
Application 10/967,816
As a final point, we note that Appellant bases no argument upon
objective evidence of nonobviousness, such as unexpected results, which
would serve to rebut the inference of obviousness established by the
Examiner.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing and the reasons well stated by
the Examiner, the Examiner's decision rejecting the appealed claims is
affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(iv)(effective Sept.
13, 2004).
AFFIRMED
cam
PATE, PIERCE & BAIRD
215 South State Street, Suite 550
Parkside Tower
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5
Last modified: September 9, 2013