Appeal No. 96-3745
Application 08/269,916
Claims 1 and 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Sells in view of Garries.3
The text of the examiner's rejections and response to the
argument presented by appellant appears in the final rejection
and answer (Paper Nos. 4 and 7), while the statement of
appellant’s argument can be found in the main and reply briefs
(Paper Nos. 6 and 9).
OPINION
In reaching our conclusion on the issues raised on
appeal, this panel of the board has carefully considered
appellant’s specification and claims, the applied patents,4
and the respective viewpoints of appellant and the examiner.
3The final rejection of claim 3 on this same ground was withdrawn by the
examiner in the answer (pages 6 and 7).
4In our evaluation of the applied patents, we have considered all of the
disclosure thereof for what it would have fairly taught one of ordinary skill
in the art. See In re Boe, 355 F.2d 961, 965, 148 USPQ 507, 510 (CCPA 1966).
Additionally, this panel of the board has taken into account not only the
specific teachings, but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would
reasonably have been expected to draw from the disclosure. See In re Preda
401 F.2d 825, 826, 159 USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA 1968).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007