Appeal No. 96-0125
Application 07/878,100
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants or the
examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the answers for the
respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
appeal, the rejections advanced by the examiner and the evidence
of obviousness relied upon by the examiner as support for the
rejections. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into
consideration, in reaching our decision, the appellants’
arguments set forth in the briefs along with the examiner’s
rationale in support of the rejections and arguments in rebuttal
set forth in the examiner’s answers.
It is our view, after consideration of the record before
us, that the examiner has not established the obviousness of the
invention as set forth in claims 1-26. Accordingly, we reverse.
We also enter a new ground of rejection against independent claim
1 using our authority under 37 CFR § 1.196(b). This new
rejection will be set forth in detail below.
We consider first the rejection of claims 1-3, 5, 7, 8
and 17-25 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Vela
in view of Humble. These claims stand or fall together [brief,
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007