Appeal No. 1998-1296
Application 08/199,304
THE REJECTION
Claims 1, 2, 13, 15, 16, 19, 22, 23, 26 and 28 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over
Christianson in view of General Dynamics.
Rather than attempt to reiterate the examiner’s full
commentary with regard to the above-noted rejection and the
conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and the
appellants regarding the rejection, we make reference to the
Examiner’s Answer (Paper No. 24) and the Appellants’ Briefs
(Papers No. 23 and 25).
OPINION
The test for obviousness is what the combined teachings
of the prior art would have suggested to one of ordinary skill
in the art. See, for example, In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413,
425, 208 USPQ 871, 881 (CCPA 1981). In establishing a prima
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007