Appeal No. 2005-1471 Page 3
Application No. 10/028,833
Claims 38, 40 to 44, 65, 68, and 69 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Mitchell in view of Williams.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the final
rejection (mailed September 3, 2003) and the answer (mailed May 17, 2004) for the
examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the brief (filed
February 6, 2004) and reply brief (filed July 20, 2004) for the appellants' arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
the appellants' specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner. Upon evaluation of
all the evidence before us, it is our conclusion that the evidence adduced by the
examiner is insufficient to establish a prima facie case of obviousness with respect to
the claims under appeal. Accordingly, we will not sustain the examiner's rejection of
claims 38, 40 to 44 and 65 to 69 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Our reasoning for this
determination follows.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007