Appeal No. 1998-0147
Application 08/446,278
obviousness with respect to independent claim 17. The
rejection of claims 17-22 over Kramer is reversed.
Kondo
The Examiner does not point out where Kondo discloses
or suggests the security means limitation of claim 17. We
find no such teaching or suggestion in Kondo. Accordingly,
the Examiner has failed to establish a prima facie case of
obviousness with respect to independent claim 17. The
rejection of claims 17-22 over Kondo is reversed.
Claims 46-52
Claims 46-52 do not recite storing the digital data in
the memory card according to an address received from the
digital signal source as in claims 1, 19, and 15, and do not
recite the security means of claim 17.
Kramer
The principal difference between Kramer and the subject
matter of each of independent claims 46-48 and 50 is that
Kramer discloses the memory 22 on a card 10 (figure 1)
separate from the replay unit (figure 2) having the
digital-to-analog converter 62, the filter circuits 70 and
- 8 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007