Appeal No. 96-1435 Application 08/265,497 Rather than repeat the arguments of appellant or the examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the answer for the respective details thereof. OPINION We have carefully considered the subject matter on appeal, the rejection advanced by the examiner and the evidence of obviousness relied upon by the examiner as support for the rejection. 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 rejection and arguments in rebuttal set forth in the examiner’s answer. It is our view, after consideration of the record before us, 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 1-10, 13-25 and 29-34. Accordingly, we reverse. Appellant has indicated that for purposes of this appeal the claims will stand or fall together in the following four groups: Group I has claims 1-6 and 19-25; Group II has 4Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007