Appeal No. 1996-0774 Page 10
Application No. 08/048,117
not cure the aforementioned defect of Fumiaki. The examiner
has not identified anything in these references or the prior
art as a whole that would have suggested generating a
reciprocal of the total amount of light and using this
reciprocal as a digital input to a D/A converter. Therefore,
we find that the examiner’s rejections do not amount to a
prima facie case of obviousness. Because the examiner has2
not established a prima facie case, the rejections of claim 2
over Fumiaki in view of Kenzo; claims 3, 4, and 7 over Fumiaki
in view of Maruta; claim 8 over Fumiaki in view of Yasuaki;
and claim 9 over Fumiaki in view of Yasuaki further in view of
Maruta are improper. Therefore, we reverse the rejection of
claims 2-4 and 7-9 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
2In this opinion, we have based our findings on the
abstracts of Fumiaki, Kenzo, Maruta, and Yasuaki. Because the
complete disclosures of these references have neither been
provided to us nor applied by the Examiner in the rejections,
we have not considered the entire disclosures. We make no
judgment as to the teachings or suggestions that the complete
references may present.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007