Appeal No. 97-1242
Application 08/226,521
Claims 2 through 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Yumoto in view of Stalker, as applied
above, further in view of Clayton.
The full text of the examiner's rejections and response
to the argument presented by appellant appears in the final
rejection and answer (Paper Nos. 13 and 18), while the complete
statement of appellant’s argument can be found in the main and
reply briefs (Paper Nos. 17 and 19).
OPINION
In reaching our conclusion on the obviousness issues
raised in this appeal, this panel of the board has carefully
considered appellant’s specification and claims, the applied
patents, and the respective viewpoints of appellant and the2
examiner. As a consequence of our review, we make the
determinations which follow.
2In our evaluation of the applied teachings, we have
considered all of the disclosure of each teaching for what it
would have fairly taught one of ordinary skill in the art. See
In re Boe, 355 F.2d 961, 965, 148 USPQ 507, 510 (CCPA 1966).
Additionally, this panel of the board has taken into account not
only the specific teachings, but also the inferences which one
skilled in the art would reasonably have been expected to draw
from the disclosure. See In re Preda, 401 F.2d 825, 826, 159
USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA 1968).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007