Appeal No. 97-1277
Application No. 07/820,261
35 U.S.C. § 103. We also note that the examiner has responded
to each of appellant’s arguments so that the record is
complete on the examiner’s factual findings and reasoning upon
which the conclusion of obviousness is based. The burden is,
therefore, upon appellant to come forward with evidence or
arguments which persuasively rebut the examiner’s prima facie
case of obviousness. Appellant has presented several
substantive arguments in response to the examiner’s rejection.
Therefore, we consider obviousness based upon the totality of
the evidence and the relative persuasiveness of the arguments.
Before we consider the propriety of the rejection
against specific claims, a brief review of the applied prior
art and the skill of the artisan is presented. Peters teaches
an electronic device for automatically keeping score of a game
played by several players and which is dividable into
repetitive units. Although the main embodiment of Peters is
directed to the scoring of a golf game, Peters also suggests
that his device can be appropriately configured to score a
baseball game. Klose teaches an electronic device in which a
game of baseball can be simulated. Klose’s device has a
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007