Appeal No. 96-1659
Application 08/166,931
U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Ferguson and Watkins in view
of Kabat.
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellant or the
examiner, we make reference to the brief and the answer for
the respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
appeal, the rejections advanced by the examiner, the arguments
in support of the rejections and the evidence of obviousness
relied upon by the examiner as support for the obviousness
rejections. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into
consideration, in reaching our decision, the appellant’s
arguments set forth in the brief 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 claims 35-49, 53 and 55-68 particularly point
out the invention in a manner which complies with 35 U.S.C. §
112. We are also of the view that the collective evidence
relied upon and the level of skill in the particular art would
not have suggested to one of ordinary skill in the art 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