Appeal No. 96-0019
Application 08/150,742
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellant or the
examiner, we make reference to the brief and the answer for the
respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
appeal, the rejection advanced by the examiner and the evidence
of obviousness relied upon by the examiner as support for the
rejection. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into
consideration, in reaching our decision, the appellant’s
arguments set forth in the brief along with the examiner's
rationale in support of the rejection and arguments in rebuttal
set forth in the examiner's answer.
It is our view, after consideration of the record before
us, that the collective evidence relied upon and the level of
skill in the particular art would have suggested to one of
ordinary skill in the art the obviousness of the invention as set
forth in claims 24-28. Accordingly, we affirm.
Appellant has nominally indicated that the claims on
appeal stand or fall together in a single group [brief, page 3].
However, appellant has made separate comments directed to the
dependent claims. The extent of appellant’s arguments is to
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007