Appeal No. 97-1932
Application 08/028,047
Shmulovich. Finally, claims 15-18 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the teachings of
Kishino and Shmulovich and further in view of the admitted
prior art.
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 rejections advanced by the examiner and the
evidence of obviousness relied upon by the examiner as support
for the rejections. 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 rejections and arguments in
rebuttal set forth in the examiner's answer.
It is our view, after consideration of the record
before us, that the collective evidence relied upon and the
level of skill in the particular art would have suggested to
one of ordinary skill in the art the obviousness of the
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007