Appeal No. 1997-2076
Application No. 08/175,718
Claims 1-3 stand finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Strohbeck in view of Spitler.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellant and the
Examiner, reference is made to the Brief and 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, Appellant’s
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 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 obviousness of the invention as set forth in claims 1-
3. Accordingly, we reverse.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007