Ex parte THOMPSON et al. - Page 3




             Appeal No. 1998-0101                                                                                 
             Application No. 08/253,996                                                                           


             Kinoshita et al. (Kinoshita)                   5,432,842                  Jul. 11,                   
             1995                                               (filed Mar.                                       
             17, 1992)                                                                                            
             Edwards et al. (Edwards), “A New Hand-off Algorithm Using                                            
             Fuzzy Logic,” Proceedings of the 1994 IEEE SOUTHEASTCON '94,                                         
             Pages 89-92, April, 1994.                                                                            

                    Claims 1, 2, 9 and 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §                                        
             103 as being unpatentable over Kinoshita in view of Hurst.                                           
                    Claims 3 through 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103                                       
             as being unpatentable over Kinoshita in view of Hurst and                                            
             further in view of Edwards.                                                                          
                    Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the                                     
             Examiner, reference is made to the brief, reply brief and                                            
             answer for the respective details thereof.                                                           


                                                    OPINION                                                       
                    After a careful review of the evidence before us, we will                                     
             not sustain the rejection of claims 1 through 7, 9 and 10                                            
             under 35 U.S.C. § 103.                                                                               
                    The Examiner has failed to set forth a prima facie case.                                      
             It is the burden of the Examiner to establish why one having                                         



                                                      -3-3                                                        





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007