Appeal No. 95-3744
Application 08/084,838
Claims 1-4, 6-13 and 15-18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103. As evidence of
obviousness the examiner offers Yanker in view of Steele with respect to claims 1, 4, 10 and 13,
adds Meier with respect to claims 2, 3, 6, 11, 12 and 15, and further adds Windows with respect
to claims 7 and 16. The examiner combines the teachings of Yanker with Steele and Apple to
support the rejection of claims 8, 9, 17 and 18.
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellant 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 appellant’s 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 ordinary skill in
the art the obviousness of the invention as set forth in claims 1-4, 6-13 and 15-18. Accordingly,
we reverse.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007