Appeal No. 1997-2429 Page 3 Application No. 08/323,215 Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the final rejection (Paper No. 6, mailed June 26, 1996) and the answer (Paper No. 11, mailed January 7, 1997) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the brief (Paper No. 10, filed November 25, 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 1-21 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Our reasoning for this determination follows.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007