Appeal No. 1997-0400
Application No. 08/080,735
upon Williams merely to teach the well-known use of data latches. Therefore, Williams
does not remedy the deficiencies in the combination of Tabata and Maeda.
Since the applied combination does not meet the limitations recited in independent
claims 34 and 51, the examiner has not set forth a prima facie case of obviousness,
therefore, we cannot sustain the rejection of independent claims 34 and 51 nor their
dependent claims 37, 40 and 52-54.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 34, 37, 40 and 51-54
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
REVERSED
JOSEPH F. RUGGIERO )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
STUART N. HECKER ) APPEALS
Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
JOSEPH L. DIXON )
Administrative Patent Judge )
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007