Appeal No. 96-3355
Application 08/004,024
The examiner’s answer only repeats the rejection under § 103 so
it is presumed that the rejection under § 102 has been withdrawn.
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 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 brief 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 1-4 and 10-18. Accordingly, we reverse.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007