Appeal No. 97-2552 Page 4
Application No. 08/541,658
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by
the examiner and the appellant regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the final rejection (Paper No.
15, mailed August 8, 1996) and the examiner's answer (Paper No.
20, mailed February 20, 1997) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the appellant's
brief (Paper No. 19, filed January 22, 1997) for the appellant's
arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellant's specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellant and the
examiner. Upon evaluation of all the evidence before us, it is
our conclusion that the evidence adduced by the examiner is
insufficient to establish obviousness with respect to any of the
claims on appeal. Accordingly, we will not sustain the
examiner's rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Our reasoning for
this determination follows.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007