Appeal No. 1997-0373 Page 4
Application No. 08/151,694
No. 14, mailed February 20, 1996) and the supplemental
examiner's answer (Paper No. 17, mailed May 13, 1996) for the
examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejection, and
to the appellant's brief (Paper No. 12, filed October 17,
1995), reply brief (Paper No. 15, filed April 18, 1996) and
supplemental reply brief (Paper No. 18, filed July 12, 1996)
for the appellant's arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellant's specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellant 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 the claims under appeal. Accordingly, we will
not sustain the examiner's rejection of claims 12 to 15, 17,
21 to 25 and 27 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Our reasoning for this
determination follows.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007