Appeal 2007-1844
Application 10/012,200
disclosed multimedia units, such as the facsimile or the cellular phone,
includes a transceiver unit as well. Therefore, the ordinarily skilled artisan
would have readily recognized that Murakami’s nodes comprise at least two
transceivers and a multimedia unit. We disagree with the Examiner’s
finding, however, that Murakami’s teaching of a plurality of transceivers
could be extended to the multimedia unit. We fail to find a sufficient
rationale in the record before us, absent Appellants’ own disclosure, that
would have led the ordinarily skilled artisan to modify the multimedia units
to include two transceivers in lieu of one.
It follows that the Examiner erred in rejecting independent claims 1,
11, and 13 as being unpatentable over Murakami. We find for these same
reasons that dependent claims 2 through 10, 12, and 14 are not unpatentable
over Murakami.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
On the record before us, the Examiner has failed to establish that
Murakami’s disclosure renders claims 1 through 14 unpatentable under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
DECISION
We have reversed the Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1 through
14.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013