Appeal No. 2000-1476
Application 08/801,918
the physical relationship between the discrete housing, the
display, the controller and the brake operator.
Hence, the combined teachings of Skantar and Yoshino do
not establish a prima facie case of obviousness with respect
to the subject matter recited in claims 1, 16 and 22. 1
Accordingly, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C. §
103(a) rejection of claims 1, 16 and 22, or of dependent
claims 2 through 15, 17 through 21 and 23 through 26, as being
unpatentable over Skantar in view of Yoshino.
1 This being so, there is no need to delve into the merits
of the appellants’ declaration evidence of non-obviousness.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007