Ex parte CREGO et al. - Page 3




         Appeal No. 2001-0464                                      Page 3          
         Application No. 08/888,967                                                


              Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced            
         by the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted              
         rejection, we make reference to the answer (Paper No. 18,                 
         mailed October 2, 2000) for the examiner's complete reasoning             
         in support of the rejection, and to the brief (Paper No. 17,              
         filed September 5, 2000) 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 6 to 10 under              
         35 U.S.C. § 103.  Our reasoning for this determination follows.           










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

Last modified: November 3, 2007