Appeal No. 97-2886
Application 08/441,493
Since, as noted above, we consider that the examiner’s
combination of the prior art in this instance is motivated solely
by impermissible hindsight, it follows that we will not sustain
the examiner’s rejection of appellant’s claim 12 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103. For the same reason, we will also not sustain the
examiner’s rejection of dependent claims 13 and 14 under 35
U.S.C. § 103.
Independent claim 15 on appeal is directed to an apparatus
for playing an anagram game, wherein the apparatus includes,
inter alia, "character moving means" for moving each of said
characters from its respective initial position to its respective
final position, and “random selection means for randomly
selecting one of said final positions into which a predetermined
one of said characters is to be moved by said character moving
means." The “character moving means”is described in the paragraph
bridging pages 4 and 5 of appellant’s specification, while the
“random selection means” is described in the paragraph bridging
pages 7 and 8 of the specification. On page 7 of his answer, the
examiner has taken the position that claim 15 on appeal presents
13
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007