Appeal No. 2001-0024
Application No. 08/827,285 Page 13
not eequivalent to the claimed "Chart of Account Attributes
object class."
From all of the above, we find that the examiner has failed
to establish a prima facie case of obviousness of claim 3.
Accordingly, the rejection of claim 3 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is
reversed. As independent claims 11, 19, and 35 contain similar
limitations, the rejection of claims 11, 19, and 35, under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a), as well as claims 4-9, 12-17, 20-25, and 35-41
dependent therefrom, is reversed.
We turn next to the rejection of claims 27-33 as
unpatentable over Bigus in view of Marks and Parrish. We reverse
the rejection of claims 27-33 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as Parrish
does not make up for the deficiencies of the basic combination to
Bigus and Marks.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007