In re Michel

Maletz, Judge.. This is an appeal from the decision of the Patent Office Board of Appeals sustaining the examiner’s rejection under 35.USC 103 of claims 2 and 7 in appellant’s patent application1 as obvious in view of the prior art. Having considered the scope and content of that prior art, the -differences between it and the claims, and the apparent level of ordinary skill in the art, Graham v. John Deere, 383 U.S. 1, 17 (1966), we find the board was correct in its conclusions-and therefore affirm its decision.

The record shows that considerable interest has developed in the use of…