Appeal No. 97-2720 Page 8
Application No. 08/354,387
Since each element of claim 1 is found in DuBois, the
decision of the examiner to reject claim 1 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) is affirmed.
Claims 4, 6 and 9
The appellants have grouped claims 1, 4, 6 and 9 as
standing or falling together. Thereby, in accordance with2
37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7), claims 4, 6 and 9 fall with claim 1.
Thus, it follows that the decision of the examiner to reject
claims 4, 6 and 9 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) is also affirmed.
The obviousness issues
We sustain the examiner's rejection of claims 2, 3, 5, 7,
8 and 10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103, but not the rejection of
claims 11 and 12.
The test for obviousness is what the combined teachings
of the references would have suggested to one of ordinary
skill in the art. See In re Young, 927 F.2d 588, 591, 18
2See page 4 of the appellants' brief.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007