Appeal No. 95-4539 Page 6
Application No. 08/205,394
examiner to support the rejections. We have also considered
the appellants’ arguments contained in the appeal brief and
the examiner’s arguments in rebuttal contained in the
examiner’s answer.
After considering the record before us, it is our view that
the collective evidence replied on and the level of skill in
the particular art would not have suggested to one of ordinary
skill in the art the obviousness of the invention in claims 2-
4, 6-9, 11, 13-15, and 18-20. Accordingly, we reverse.
Grouping of claims
The appellants state that for the appeal the claims
should be considered as seven groups. The first group
comprises claims 2, 7, 9, and 18. The second group comprises
claim 8. The third group comprises claims 13 and 20. The
fourth group comprises claims 14 and 15. The fifth group
comprises claims 3 and 4. The sixth group comprises claims 16
and 19. The seventh and final group comprises claim 11.
(Appeal Br. at 9-10.) The appellants have further provided
reasons why the claims of the groups are believed to be
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007