Appeal No. 2002-1352
Application 09/051,975
Reference is made to the final rejection mailed May 23, 2001
(Paper No. 13) filtered through the prism of the examiner's
answer (Paper No. 23, mailed January 30, 2002) and the
supplemental examiner’s answer (Paper No. 29, mailed August 28,
2003) for the reasoning in support of the above-noted obviousness
rejection and to appellants’ brief (Paper No. 22, filed December
19 2001) and reply brief (Paper No. 24, filed March 22, 2002) for
appellants’ arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In arriving at our decision on the obviousness issues in
this appeal, we have given careful consideration to appellants’
specification and claims, the teachings of the applied prior art
references, and the respective positions advanced by appellants
and the examiner. Upon evaluation of all of the evidence before
us, it is our conclusion that the examiner has established a
sound case of obviousness with regard to claims 9, 10, 13, 16, 18
through 20 and 23 on appeal and that the rejection of such claims
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) will therefore be sustained. Our
reasoning for this determination follows.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007