Appeal No. 96-3059
Application No. 08/170,569
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
appeal, the rejection advanced by the examiner and the
evidence of obviousness relied upon by the examiner as support
for the rejection. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into
consideration, in reaching our decision, the appellants’
arguments set forth in the brief along with the examiner’s
rationale in support of the rejection and arguments in
rebuttal set forth in the examiner’s answer.
It is our view, after consideration of the record
before us, that the evidence relied upon would not have
suggested to one of ordinary skill in the art the obviousness
of the invention as set forth in claims 1-17. Accordingly, we
reverse.
Appellants have indicated that for purposes of this
appeal the claims will stand or fall together in the following
two groups: Group I has claims 1-4 and 10-13, and Group II has
claims 5-9 and 14-17. Consistent with this indication
appellants have made no separate arguments with respect to any
of the claims within each group. Accordingly, all the claims
within each group will stand or fall together. Note In re
King, 801 F.2d 1324, 1325, 231 USPQ 136, 137 (Fed. Cir. 1986);
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007