Appeal No. 2003-0965
Application No. 09/030,829
reviewing the [E]xaminer's decision on appeal, the Board must
necessarily weigh all of the evidence and argument." Oetiker,
977 F.2d at 1445, 24 USPQ2d at 1444. "[T]he Board must not only
assure that the requisite findings are made, based on evidence of
record, but must also explain the reasoning by which the findings
are deemed to support the agency's conclusion." In re Lee,
277 F.3d 1338, 1344, 61 USPQ2d 1430, 1434 (Fed. Cir. 2002).
With respect to independent claim 1, we find that the Examiner
has not addressed the limitation of Appellants' claims that require
that "the timing of the output of the response status being . . .
continuous. . . for each read data." For this reason alone, we find
that the Examiner has not met the initial burden of establishing a
prima facie case of obviousness with respect to the rejection based on
these two references. Therefore, we will not sustain the Examiner's
rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
III. Whether the Rejection of Claims 3-9 Under 35 U.S.C. § 103
is proper?
It is our view, after consideration of the record before us,
that the evidence relied upon and the level of skill in the
particular art would not have suggested to one of ordinary skill
in the art the obviousness of the invention as set forth in
claims 3-9. Accordingly, we reverse.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007