Appeal No. 1997-0233 Page 3
Application No. 08/266,558
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted
rejection, we make reference to the answer for the examiner's
complete reasoning in support of the rejection, and to the
brief (Paper No. 15, filed June 4, 1996) and reply brief
(Paper No. 17, filed August 27, 1996) 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 3, 5 and 6
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