Appeal 2007-1223
Application 10/007,149
We note that Appellants have not relied upon evidence of unexpected results
to rebut the Examiner’s obviousness determination.
CONCLUSION
Based on our consideration of the totality of the record before us, having
evaluated the prima facie case of obviousness in view of Appellants’ arguments,
we conclude that the subject matter of claims 1, 6, 10-12, 15-17, 19-24, 26-45, and
50-63 would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art from the
combined teachings of the cited prior art. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445,
24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992). Accordingly, the Examiner's rejections
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are affirmed.
TIME FOR TAKING ACTION
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).
AFFIRMED
clj
PPG Industries, Inc.
Intellectual Property Department
One PPG Place
Pittsburgh, PA 15272
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5
Last modified: September 9, 2013