Appeal No. 96-2372
Application 08/278,676
Reference is made to the examiner's answer (Paper
No. 35, mailed January 23, 1996) for the examiner's reasoning in
support of the above-noted rejections. Appellants' arguments
thereagainst are found in the brief (Paper No. 34, filed
October 23, 1995).
OPINION
In reaching our conclusion on the obviousness issues
raised in this appeal, we have carefully considered appellants'
specification and claims, the applied prior art, and the
respective viewpoints advanced by appellants and the examiner.
As a consequence of our review, we have made the determination
that the examiner's rejections of the appealed claims under 35
U.S.C. § 103 cannot be sustained. However, we have also decided
to remand the application to the examiner for further
consideration. Our reasons follow.
The examiner's statements notwithstanding, when the
disclosure of Callahan is fully considered, we fail to find
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007