Appeal No. 1999-0487
Application No. 08/554,425
4. Claim 6 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over the teachings of Mita in view of
Yonekawa and further in view of Greenberg.
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellant or the
examiner, we make reference to the brief and the answer for
the respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
appeal, the rejections advanced by the examiner and the
evidence of obviousness relied upon by the examiner as support
for the rejections. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken
into consideration, in reaching our decision, the appellant’s
arguments set forth in the brief along with the examiner’s
rationale in support of the rejection sand arguments in
rebuttal set forth in the examiner’s answer.
It is our view, after consideration of the record before
us, that the evidence relied upon and the level of skill in
the particular art would not have suggested to one of ordinary
skill in the art the obviousness of the invention as set forth
in claims 1-8. Accordingly, we reverse.
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, it is
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007