Appeal No. 1998-3316
Application No. 08/203,300
The full text of the examiner's rejection and response to
the argument presented by appellant appears in the main and
supplemental answers (Paper Nos. 25 and 28), while the
complete statement of appellant's argument can be found in the
main, reply and supplemental reply briefs (Paper Nos. 24, 27,
and 29).
OPINION
In reaching our conclusion on the obviousness issue
raised in this appeal, this panel of the board has carefully
considered appellant's specification, drawings, and claims,
the applied teachings, and the respective viewpoints of2
2In our evaluation of the applied prior art, we have
considered all of the disclosure of each document for what it
would have fairly taught one of ordinary skill in the art.
See In re Boe, 355 F.2d 961, 965, 148 USPQ 507, 510 (CCPA
1966). Additionally, this panel of the board has taken into
account not only the specific teachings, but also the
inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably have
been expected to draw from the disclosure. See In re Preda,
401 F.2d 825, 826,
159 USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA 1968).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007