Appeal No. 97-2557 Page 4
Application No. 08/453,829
25, 1995 (Paper No. 14), the examiner's answer (Paper No. 17,
mailed April 17, 1996) and the supplemental examiner's answer
(Paper No. 20, mailed August 13, 1996) for the examiner's
complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the
appellants' brief (Paper No. 16, filed December 26, 1995), reply
brief (Paper No. 18, filed June 17, 1996) and supplemental reply
brief (Paper No. 21, filed October 9, 1996) for the appellants'
arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellants' specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the
examiner. Upon evaluation of all the evidence before us, it is
our conclusion that the evidence adduced by the examiner is
insufficient to establish a prima facie case of obviousness with
respect to any of the claims under appeal. Accordingly, we will
not sustain the examiner's rejection of claims 1 through 25 under
35 U.S.C. § 103. Our reasoning for this determination follows.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007