Appeal No. 1998-3295 Page 3
Application No. 08/054,223
rejection, we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper
No. 27, mailed June 9, 1998) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejection, and to the appellant's
brief (Paper No. 26, filed March 10, 1998) for the appellant's
arguments thereagainst.3
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellant's specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellant and the
examiner. Upon evaluation of all the evidence before us, it
is our conclusion that the evidence adduced by the examiner is
insufficient to establish a prima facie case of obviousness
with respect to claim 2. Accordingly, we will not sustain the
examiner's rejection of claim 2 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Our
reasoning for this determination follows.
3Since the other grounds of rejection set forth in the
final rejection (paper No. 13, mailed December 30, 1994) were
not set forth in the examiner's answer we assume that these
other grounds of rejection have been withdrawn by the
examiner. See Ex parte Emm, 118 USPQ 180, 181 (Bd. App.
1957).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007