Appeal No. 2004-0316
Application 09/136,619
Lastly, we consider the subject matter of dependent claims
25-28 that are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Wen alone.
According to the reasons set forth by the examiner at page 6 of
the final rejection, we sustain this rejection in addition to the
examiner's responsive arguments at page 5 of the answer. Each of
these claims 25-28 recite the same feature, namely, that the
markings of the independent claims comprise "frame numbers."
Although we agree with appellant's view at page 7 of the brief
that Wen's teaching of an index formed by thumbnail images does
not indicate frame numbers per se, we agree with the examiner's
positions. The examiner's reliance upon "Official notice" is
noted at the bottom of page 7 of the brief but is not challenged
per se. The appellant merely argues that the examiner's
rationale is based upon hindsight.
In addressing this criticism at page 5 of the answer the
examiner, within 35 U.S.C. § 103, argues that the "usage of track
numbers is probably implied with the usage of the term "index" in
Wen. We also agree with the examiner's further views stated
here:
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007