Appeal No. 2000-0887 Page 5
Application No. 08/848,238
rejections. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into
consideration, in reaching our decision, appellants' arguments
set forth in the briefs along with the examiner's rationale in
support of the rejections and 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 invention as set forth in claims 1-17 and
20-31. Accordingly, we reverse, essentially for the reasons
set forth by appellants.
We begin with the rejection of claims 1-17 and 20-30
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Shaheen in view
of Yamada. The examiner's position (answer, pages 4 and 5) is
that Shaheen discloses optical fibers 18 which stick out of
the fixture and bend in a direction away from the plane, but
does not disclose a fixture with first and second sets of
grooves, wherein the first set of grooves is smaller than the
second set of grooves and lying substantially in one plane.
To overcome this deficiency in Shaheen, the examiner turns to
Yamada for a teaching of a fixture having straight and
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007