Appeal No. 1996-3975
Application No. 08/328,179
As evidence of obviousness, the examiner relies upon the
following references.
Goffinet, Jr. (Goffinet) 3,635,919 Jan.
18, 1972
Mori 4,469,853 Sep.
4, 1984
THE REJECTION
Claims 8 through 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103,
as being unpatentable over Mori in view of Goffinet.
OPINION
We have carefully considered all of the arguments
advanced by appellants and the examiner and agree with
appellants that the aforementioned rejection is not well
founded. Accordingly, we will not sustain the rejection.
The initial inquiry into determining the propriety of the
examiner’s obviousness analysis is to correctly construe the
scope and meaning of the claimed subject matter. Gechter v.
Davidson, 116 F.3d 1454, 1457, 43 USPQ2d 1030, 1032 (Fed. Cir.
1997); In re Paulsen, 30 F.3d 1475, 1479, 31 USPQ2d 1671, 1674
(Fed. Cir. 1994). Generally, we give the broadest reasonable
interpretation to the terms in the claims consistent with
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007