Appeal No. 1997-4047 Page 5
Application No. 08/309,508
than repeat the arguments of the appellant or examiner in
toto, we refer the reader to the briefs and answers for the
respective details thereof.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we considered
the subject matter on appeal and the rejections and evidence
advanced by the examiner. Furthermore, we duly considered the
arguments of the appellant and examiner. After considering
the totality of the record, we are not persuaded that the
examiner erred in rejecting claim 1. We are persuaded,
however, that he erred in rejecting claims 2 and 3.
Accordingly, we affirm-in-part.
We begin by finding that the references represent the
level of ordinary skill in the art. See In re GPAC Inc., 57
F.3d 1573, 1579, 35 USPQ2d 1116, 1121 (Fed. Cir. 1995)
(finding that the Board of Patent Appeals and Interference did
not err in concluding that the level of ordinary skill in the
art was best determined by the references of record); In re
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007