Appeal No. 1999-0346 Page 5
Application No. 08/760,683
The appellants have not specifically contested this
rejection. Accordingly, we summarily sustain the rejection of
claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph.
The obviousness rejection
In reaching our decision in this appeal on this
rejection, we have given careful consideration to the
appellants' specification and claims, to the applied prior art
references, and to the respective positions articulated by the
appellants 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 prima2
facie case of obviousness with respect to the claims under
appeal. Accordingly, we will not sustain the examiner's
rejection of claims 1 through 10 under
35 U.S.C. § 103. Our reasoning for this determination
follows.
2On page 6 of the answer, the examiner refers to a number
of references of record that have not been applied in the
rejection under appeal. These references will be given no
consideration since they were not included in the statement of
the rejection. See Ex parte Raske, 28 USPQ2d 1304, 1305 (Bd.
Pat. App. & Int. 1993).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007