Appeal 2007-1786
Application 10/121,365
1 With regard to the rejection of claims 4, 6, and 7, the Examiner's position
2 can be found on pages 4 and 5 of the Answer. These claims have not been
3 argued by Appellant.
4 We reverse.
5 ISSUE
6 With regard to the rejection of claims 1-3 and 5 under 35 U.S.C.
7 § 102(b), the issue is whether Ishii, expressly or under the principles of
8 inherency, anticipates the language of claim 1. With regard to the rejection
9 of claims claims 4, 6, and 7 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being obvious over
10 Ishii, the issue is whether the Examiner has articulated a prima facie case of
11 obviousness of these claims.
12
13
14 FINDINGS OF FACT
15 We find that the following enumerated findings are supported by at
16 least a preponderance of the evidence. Ethicon, Inc. v. Quigg, 849 F.2d
17 1422, 1427, 7 USPQ2d 1152, 1156 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (explaining the general
18 evidentiary standard for proceedings before the Office).
19 1. Appellant invented a medical imaging device,
20 method, and computer program for use in a safety critical environment.
21 (Specification 1.)
22 2. One or more peripheral devices are provided with a separate
23 emergency control means which are arranged to allow the peripheral
24 apparatus provided with emergency control means to operate independently
25 from the central control unit. (Specification 1-2.)
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013