Appeal No. 2001-2101
Application No. 09/111,495
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the
Examiner, reference is made to the Briefs2 and the Answer 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, 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 obviousness of the invention as set forth in
appealed claims 1-6 and 8-24. Accordingly, we reverse.
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, it is
incumbent upon the Examiner to establish a factual basis to
2 The Appeal Brief was filed October 16, 2000 (Paper No. 7). In
response to the Examiner’s Answer mailed January 17, 2001 (Paper No. 8), a
Reply Brief was filed March 6, 2001 (Paper No. 9), which was acknowledged and
entered by the Examiner in the communication dated March 28, 2001 (Paper No.
10).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007