Appeal No. 1999-0225
Application No. 08/563,188
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, Appellants’ 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 1-7.
Accordingly, we affirm.
Appellants’ arguments in response to the Examiner’s
obviousness rejection of the appealed claims are organized
according to a suggested grouping of claims indicated at page 4 of
the Brief. We will address these arguments accordingly and will
consider the appealed claims separately only to the extent that
separate arguments are of record in this appeal. Any dependent
claim not argued separately in the Briefs will stand or fall with
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007