Appeal No. 95-4863
Application 07/865,993
McElroy 3,756,070 Sep. 04, 1973
Sonderegger et al.
(Sonderegger) 4,519,254 May 28, 1985
Gürich 4,712,036 Dec. 08, 1987
Bundy et al. (Bundy) 4,893,049 Jan. 09, 1990
Lukasiewicz et al.
(Lukasiewicz) 5,126,617 June 30, 1992
(effectively filed Nov. 09, 1987)
Claims 1 and 2 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103. As
evidence of obviousness the examiner offers Sonderegger or
Lukasiewicz in view of Epstein, Bundy, McElroy or Gürich.
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants or the
examiner, we make reference to the brief 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
rejections. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into
consideration, in reaching our decision, the appellants'
arguments set forth in the brief 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 collective evidence relied upon and the level of
skill in the particular art would not have suggested to one of
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007