Ex parte CHEN et al. - Page 4




          Appeal No. 1998-0527                                                        
          Application No. 08/344,325                                                  
          the 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, the appellants’                    





          arguments set forth in the brief 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 3-6 and 8-11.  Accordingly, we reverse.                 
          Appellants have indicated that for purposes of this                         
          appeal the claims will all stand or fall together as a single               
          group [brief, page 3].  Consistent with this indication                     
          appellants have made no separate arguments with respect to any              
                                          4                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007