Appeal No. 95-3725
Application 07/944,318
Claims 11-23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103. As
evidence of obviousness the examiner offers Fiorda, Yamanaka and
Ohmura taken collectively.
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants or the
examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the answers 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 appellants'
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 answers.
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 11-23. Accordingly, we reverse.
With respect to each of independent claims 11, 13 and 23,
the examiner has noted that each element of the claimed
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007