Appeal No. 96-0125 Application 07/878,100 Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants or the examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the answers 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 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 examiner has not established the obviousness of the invention as set forth in claims 1-26. Accordingly, we reverse. We also enter a new ground of rejection against independent claim 1 using our authority under 37 CFR § 1.196(b). This new rejection will be set forth in detail below. We consider first the rejection of claims 1-3, 5, 7, 8 and 17-25 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Vela in view of Humble. These claims stand or fall together [brief, 4Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007