Appeal No. 95-3338
Application 07/994,035
hinges and either one of Hawkins or Blonder for the write-on
features.
Thus, the examiner has cited four references in the
rejection and not one of these applied references teaches or
suggests the claimed window in the computer housing cover. The
rationale for this rejection is set forth, in its entirety, in
one paragraph at page 5 of the answer and no mention is made
there at all as to what the examiner's rationale is with regard
to the claimed window. Nowhere in the answer does the examiner
explain how the claimed subject matter, including the window, is
made obvious by the applied references, but we might infer, from
the penultimate paragraph in the answer, that the examiner relies
on the same reasoning, i.e., cassette or CD player, he applied
with regard to the rejection over Derocher.
To the extent that the examiner does, indeed, rely on a
"cassette or CD player" to provide for the teaching of a window
in the cover of a computer housing, we reject this line of
reasoning for the reasons explained supra.
Since the examiner has failed to set forth a prima
facie case of obviousness with regard to the claimed subject
matter, the examiner's decision is reversed.
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007