Appeal No. 97-3400
Application 08/584,908
seen as providing any such suggestion. Lowenstein pertains to a
classification and indexing system for motion pictures, the main
component of which is an article which carries a series of
chronologically non-consecutive views occurring on a particular
motion picture film. Holson’s disclosure, insofar as pertinent,
is nothing more a photo album page having a plurality of pockets
for receiving pictures. From our perspective, what is lacking in
the examiner’s evidentiary basis is any teaching of laying out
the picture and non-picture areas on an index print sheet in the
same relative locations as the image and non-image areas on the
film sheet.
We also must disagree with the examiner to the extent he
contends that the claimed relationship between the areas on the
film and index print sheet is of no patentable moment. The
examiner has failed to indicate any teaching in the applied
references or any prior knowledge generally available to one of
ordinary skill in the art that would have led an ordinarily
skilled artisan to provide a film sheet and an index print sheet
in accordance with the requirements of claim 5. In short, the
rejection of appealed claim 5 must fail for lack of a sufficient
factual basis. In re Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 1017, 154 USPQ 173,
178 (CCPA 1967), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 1057 (1968).
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007