Appeal No. 1996-3799
Application No. 08/252,511
The examiner relies upon the following prior art
references as evidence of unpatentability:
Gilles 4,025,486 May 24,
1977
Chaser 4,444,929 Apr. 24,
1984
Neri et al. (Neri) 4,957,956 Sep. 18,
1990
Claims 1 through 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as unpatentable over the combined teachings of Chaser, Gilles,
and Neri. (Examiner’s answer, pages 3-4.)1
Upon careful consideration of the entire record, we agree
with the appellant (substitute appeal brief, page 8) that the 2
examiner has not established a prima facie case of obviousness
within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 103. Accordingly, we
reverse. The reasons for our determination follow.
1The examiner has withdrawn the rejection of claims 1
through 12 under the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112.
(Examiner’s answer, page 3; final Office action, page 2.)
2It appears that the substitute appeal brief (“Corrected
Brief on Appeal” filed April 2, 1999), which eliminated
certain minor informalities in the original appeal brief
(Paper 8), has not been recorded in the “Contents” section of
the file wrapper. On return of this application, the examiner
should ensure that the substitute appeal brief is assigned a
paper number and is clerically entered.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007