Ex parte EDWARD F. ALLINA - Page 4

          Appeal No. 97-1002                                                          
          Application 08/014,379                                                      

          5. Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.  103 as                   
          being unpatentable over Zisa in view of Melanson and Dell Orfano,           
          and further in view of Brady and Rozanski.                                  
          Rather than repeat the arguments of appellant or the                        
          examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the answers for the           
          respective details thereof.                                                 
          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 appellant’s                    
          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 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 4, 5 and 14-21.  Accordingly, we reverse.                   
          In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C.  103, it is                            
          incumbent upon the examiner to establish a factual basis to                 
          support the legal conclusion of obviousness.  See In re Fine, 837           


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007