Appeal No. 97-0903
Application No. 08/266,865
Corp., 837 F.2d 1044, 1051, 5 USPQ2d 1434, 1438 (Fed. Cir.),
cert. denied, 488 U.S.
825 (1988); Ashland Oil, Inc. v. Delta Resins & Refractories,
Inc., 776 F.2d 281, 293, 227 USPQ 657, 664 (Fed. Cir. 1985),
cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1017 (1986); ACS Hosp. Sys., Inc. v.
Montefiore Hosp., 732 F.2d 1572, 1577, 221 USPQ 929, 933
(Fed. Cir. 1984). These showings by the examiner are an
essential part of complying with the burden of presenting a
prima facie case of obviousness. Note In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d
1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
With respect to representative, independent claim 1,
the examiner cites Taniguchi ’201 as teaching the conventional
practice to record data on a frame of film such that a printer
prints the image according to the instructions indicated by
the data [answer, page 3]. Taniguchi ’006 and Hata were also
cited as evidence of coding the film to control a printer
[id., page 5]. The examiner cites Itabashi, Lapeyre and
Hattori as teaching that it was known to use light-emitting
diodes to generate data for recordation on the film. The
examiner asserts that the invention of claim 1 would have
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007