Appeal No. 98-1193 Application No. 08/448,687 marks of said another [second] set being at spaced intervals different from said periodic marks of said one [first] set.” The examiner finds in Sobjack all of the subject matter recited in claim 1 except for the double set of markings, the T-shaped configuration of the marks, and the different space intervals of the periodic marks of the two sets of marks. It is the examiner’s position, however, that Jansen teaches providing a double set of differently spaced interval index markings placed on opposite edges of a tape, that Walker teaches the required T-shaped markings, and that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of the three references in such a manner as to render the subject matter of claim 1 obvious. See Answer, pages 4 and 5. As can be expected, in the Brief the appellant takes issue with these conclusions, and provides a number of reasons why the rejection is defective. We find ourselves in agreement with the appellant. Our quarrel with the examiner’s position begins with the conclusion that combining the teachings of Sobjack and Jansen would have yielded the required two sets of markings having different spaced intervals. First of all, to the extent that 5Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007