Appeal No. 96-1489
Application 08/139,876
Claims 1-6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103. As
evidence of obviousness, the examiner relies upon Dahlin in
view of Gillig.2
Rather than repeat the positions of the appellant and the
examiner, reference is made to the Briefs and the Answer for 3
the respective details thereof.
OPINION
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 1-6 under
35 U.S.C. § 103.
After a careful study of the positions of the appellant
and the examiner, as well as conducting a careful study of the
two references relied upon by the examiner in the rejection of
the claims on appeal, we conclude that we must reverse the
rejection. The examiner’s motivation rationale at pages 4 and
2A new ground of rejection in the Answer was later
withdrawn as indicated by the examiner in separate commun-
ications mailed on May 16, 1995 and July 25, 1995.
3 We have not considered the Reply Brief filed on April
27, 1995 because the communication from the examiner on May
16, 1995, indicated the examiner had not entered it. However,
we have considered the Reply Brief filed on May 30, 1995,
since the examiner has noted its entry in the communication
from the examiner on July 25, 1995.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007