Appeal No. 97-4185 Page 4
Application No. 08/602,274
brief (Paper No. 11, filed April 17, 1997) and reply brief
(Paper No. 13, filed August 18, 1997) for the appellants'
arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellants' specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the
examiner. Upon evaluation of all the evidence before us, it
is our conclusion that the evidence adduced by the examiner is
sufficient to establish obviousness only with respect to
claims 1, 2, 9 to 11 and 15. Accordingly, we will sustain the
examiner's rejection of claims 1, 2, 9 to 11 and 15 under
35 U.S.C. § 103. We will not sustain the examiner's rejection
of claims 3 to 7, 12 and 14 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Our
reasoning for this determination follows.
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
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007