Appeal No. 95-1626
Application 07/804,013
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
appeal, the rejections advanced by the examiner, the arguments
in support of the rejections and the evidence of obviousness
relied upon by the examiner as support for the obviousness
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 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 disclosure in this application describes
the claimed invention in a manner which complies with the
requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 112. We are also of the view that
the claims particularly point out the invention in a manner
which also complies with 35 U.S.C. § 112. We are further of
the view that the claims are properly directed to an operative
invention and, therefore, possess the disclosed utility.
Finally, we are of the view that the 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 1-3, 5-25, 28, 34 and
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007