Appeal No. 1996-4111
Application No. 08/311,902
We have carefully reviewed the claims, specification and
applied prior art, including all of the arguments and evidence
advanced by both the examiner and appellant in support of their
respective positions. This review leads us to conclude that the
examiner’s § 103 rejection is well founded. Accordingly, we will
sustain the examiner’s § 103 rejection. Our reasons for this
determination follow.
In our decision entered August 23, 2000, we determined that
the combined teachings of the admitted prior art and Davidson
would have rendered the claimed subject matter prima facie
obvious within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 103. See the earlier
decision, pages 5-7. The factual findings and conclusions set
2(...continued)
referred to as “the earlier decision”), the examiner’s rejection
of claims 15 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, was
reversed. See the earlier decision, page 3. This application,
however, was remanded to the examiner to provide complete
analyses of the evidence of unobviousness relied upon by
appellant. See the earlier decision, pages 4-9. We deferred the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007