Appeal No. 2000-2255
Application No. 09/123,522
Claims 1-11 stand finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Newton in view of Zaitsu.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellant and the
Examiner, reference is made to the Brief (Paper No. 15) and
Answer (Paper No. 17) for the respective details.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on appeal,
the rejection advanced by the Examiner and the evidence of
obviousness relied upon by the Examiner as support for the
rejection. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into
consideration, in reaching our decision, Appellant’s arguments
set forth in the Brief along with the Examiner’s rationale in
support of the rejection 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 have suggested to one of ordinary skill in
the art the obviousness of the invention as set forth in claims
1, 6, 7, and 11. We reach the opposite conclusion with respect
to claims 2-5 and 8-10. Accordingly, we affirm-in-part.
As a general proposition in an appeal involving a rejection
under 35 U.S.C. § 103, an Examiner is under a burden to make out
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007