Appeal No. 2000-0951 Page 3 Application No. 08/640,160 Claims 5, 6, 11, 19, 20 and 25 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Griggs in view of Romaine and Blanchard. Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and the appellant regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the answer (Paper No. 23, mailed January 18, 2000) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the brief (Paper No. 22, filed November 1, 1999) and reply brief (Paper No. 24, filed April 3, 2000) for the appellant's arguments thereagainst. OPINION In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to the appellant's specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the respective positions articulated by the appellant 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 willPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007