Appeal No. 1997-0500 Application 08/404,704 Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants or the examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the answer for the respective details thereof. 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, the appellants’ arguments set forth in the briefs 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 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 as set forth in claims 1-31. Accordingly, we reverse. At the outset, we dispose of the issue related to the examiner’s objection of the claims under 37 CFR § 1.75 as being unduly multiplied. Although we do not agree with the 4Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007