Appeal No. 2005-0900
Application No. 10/098,588
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants or the
examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the answer for the
respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
appeal, the rejections advanced by the examiner and the evidence
of obviousness relied upon by the examiner as support for the
prior art rejection. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into
consideration, in reaching our decision, the appellants’
arguments set forth in the briefs along with the examiner’s
rationale in support of the rejections and arguments in rebuttal
set forth in the examiner’s answer.
It is our view, after consideration of the record before
us, that the claims on appeal are in compliance with the second
paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112. We are also of the view 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 the claims on
appeal. Accordingly, we reverse.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007