Ex parte CORBIN et al. - Page 4




          Appeal No. 1997-3897                                       Page 4           
          Application No. 08/458,930                                                  


               Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced              
          by the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted                
          rejections, we make reference to the answer (Paper No. 14,                  
          mailed May 1, 1997) for the examiner's complete reasoning in                
          support of the rejections, and to the brief (Paper No. 13,                  
          filed February 5, 1997) 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, 2 and 4 to                
          16 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  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007