Appeal No. 2003-0023
Application No. 09/046,289
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the
Examiner, reference is made to the Briefs1 and Answer for the
respective details.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on appeal,
the rejection advanced by the Examiner, the arguments in support
of the rejection 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 set forth in claims
26-45. Accordingly, we reverse.
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, it is
incumbent upon the Examiner to establish a factual basis to
1 The Appeal Brief was filed February 26, 2002 (Paper No. 13). In
response to the Examiner’s Answer dated May 3, 2002 (Paper No. 14), a Reply
Brief was filed July 8, 2002 (Paper No. 15), which was acknowledged and
entered by the Examiner as indicated in the communication dated July 30, 2002
(Paper No. 16).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007