Appeal No. 1998-2672
Application No. 07/955,768
Claims 1-3, 8-12, and 17-26 stand finally rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Averbuch in view of
Ernst.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellant and the
Examiner, reference is made to the Brief (paper no. 27) and
Answer (paper no. 28) for the respective details.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
appeal, the rejection advanced by the Examiner, and the
evidence of obviousness relied upon by the Examiner as support
for the rejection. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into
consideration, in reaching our decision, Appellant’s arguments
set forth in the Brief along with the Examiner’s rationale in
support of the rejection and arguments in rebuttal set forth
in the Examiner’s Answer.
It is our view, after consideration of the record before
us, that the evidence relied upon and the level of skill in
the particular art would not have suggested to one of ordinary
skill in the art the obviousness of the invention as set forth
in claims 1-3, 8-12, and 17-26. Accordingly, we reverse.
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, it is
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007