Ex Parte OBERMAIER - Page 2



                Appeal No. 2005-0324                                                                           
                Application No. 09/390,824                                                                     


                                                  Invention                                                    
                      The invention relates to a system for on-line replacement of cards in a                  
                computer system in which laterally installable cards are installed longitudinally              
                through an opening in an external wall of a computer system chassis.  See                      
                appellant’s abstract.                                                                          
                      Claim 1 is representative of the invention and a copy of the claim is                    
                appended to this decision.                                                                     
                                                 References                                                    
                      The references relied upon by the examiner are:                                          
                Welsh                          4,935,847                 Jun.  19, 1990                      
                Beak                           5,496,185                 Mar.  05, 1996                      
                Cranston, III et al. (Cranston) 5,708,563                 Jan.  13, 1998                      
                Clements                       5,963,681                 Oct.   05, 1999                     
                Moss                           6,185,093                 Feb.  06, 2001                      
                                                                     (Filed Nov. 12, 1997)                     
                                              Rejection at Issue                                               
                      Claims 1, 3, 4, 6 through 9, 13, 14,17 through 19 and 23 through 28 stand                
                rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious over Moss in view of Cranston.                 
                Claim 5 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious Moss in view of                 
                Cranston and Welsh.  Claims 10, 12, 15, 29 and 30 stand rejected under 35                      
                U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious over Moss in view of Cranston and Clements.                      
                Claim 11 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious over Moss in                   


                                                      -2-                                                      



Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007