Appeal No. 1997-2658
Application No. 08/478,974
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the
Examiner, reference is made to the Briefs and Answer for the 2
respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
appeal, the rejection advanced by the Examiner and the
evidence of obviousness relied upon by the Examiner as support
for the rejection. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into
consideration in reaching our decision, Appellants’ arguments
set forth in the Briefs along with the Examiner’s rationale in
support of the rejection and arguments in rebuttal set forth
in the Examiner’s Answer.
It is our view, after consideration of the record before
us, that the evidence relied upon and the level of skill in
the particular art would not have suggested to one of ordinary
skill in the art the obviousness of the invention as set forth
in claims 2-21 and 34-41. We reach the opposite conclusion
2The Appeal Brief was filed January 6, 1997. In response
to the Examiner’s Answer dated February 19, 1997 a Reply Brief
was filed April 24, 1997, which was entered by the Examiner
without further comment in the letter dated April 21, 1998.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007