Appeal No. 95-0206
Application 07/866,789
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellant 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 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, the appellant’s
arguments set forth in the briefs 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 collective 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 1-7. Accordingly, we reverse.
Appellant has indicated that for purposes of this appeal
the claims will stand or fall together in the following two
groups: Group I has claims 1, 3, 4, 6 and 7, and Group II has
claims 2 and 5. Consistent with this indication appellant has
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007