Appeal No. 2001-1944
Application No. 08/734,857
connected in the manner required by the claims on appeal.
Appellant’s remarks at the bottom of page 4 of the Reply brief
are consistent with this understanding as well as the substance
of paragraphs 5, 6 and 7 of the affidavit of Mr. Bogley.
Thus, if we were to consider the teachings and suggestions
of Schindler and any inferences that the artisan would have
reasonably derived therefrom in a light most favorably to the
examiner, the subject matter of the claimed invention still would
not have been met. The weight of the evidence before us in the
form of Schindler as well as the affidavit of Mr. Bogley leads us
to conclude that it would not have been obvious for the artisan
to have connected a telephone handset in the manner claimed to
the sound card of a personal computer.
In order for us to sustain the examiner’s rejection under
35 U.S.C. § 103, we would need to resort to speculation or
unfounded assumptions to supply deficiencies in the factual basis
of the rejections. In re Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 1017, 154 USPQ
173, 178 (CCPA 1967), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 1057 (1968), reh’g
denied, 390 U.S. 1000 (1968). This we decline to do. Here,
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007