Appeal No. 2000-0320 Page 4
Application No. 08/480,082
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted
rejection, we make reference to the final rejection (Paper No.
17, mailed June 11, 1998) and the answer (Paper No. 22, mailed
March 1, 1999) for the examiner's complete reasoning in
support of the rejection, and to the brief (Paper No. 21,
filed November 16, 1998) for the appellants' arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, 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 prima facie case of obviousness
with respect to the claims under appeal. Accordingly, we will
not sustain the examiner's rejection of claims 1 to 9 and 18
to 26 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Our reasoning for this
determination follows.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007