Appeal No. 96-1492
Application 07/666,162
for the 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 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, 2, 4, 5, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14 and 17-36.
Accordingly, we reverse.
Appellants have indicated that for purposes of this
appeal the claims will stand or fall together in the following
two groups: Group I has claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14,
17-22, 25, 28, 31 and 34, and Group II has claims 23, 24, 26,
27, 29, 30, 32, 33, 35 and 36. Consistent with this
indication appellants have made no separate arguments with
respect to any of the claims within each group. Accordingly,
all the claims within each group will stand or fall together.
Note In re King,
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007