Appeal No. 1996-3669
Application No. 08/274,132
Claims 13-16, 18-24, and 26-29 stand finally rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combined
teachings of Seefeldt and Balmer.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the
Examiner, reference is made to the Brief and Answer for the
respective details.
OPINION
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, Appellants’
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 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
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007