Heck I might be tempted to use his own rejection explanation against his own argument of being obvious to someone with ORDINARY skill

Don't forget the changing prior art also cited as obvious which transpired not to be. The examiner has had to dig so deep to find something which might be related that he has, as you rightly observe, showed how this wasn't obvious to anyone at that time, let alone one of ordinary skill.

Ironic that in trying to show obviouness he has done the exact opposite.

(Huge grinning smiley)

Be well