Appeal No. 1997-2499
Application No. 08/228,449
method claims require a feeding path operated at a temperature
of 200°C to 410°C and varying a feeding speed of the recording
medium in accordance with a temperature change. The method
claims further require heating the recording medium to a
temperature between 200 C and 410 C. Accordingly, weo o
conclude that the heating step, the temperature range and
variation of feeding speed in accordance with a temperature
change constitute positive method limitations which must be
shown by the examiner in order to establish a prima facie case
of obviousness. Their absence in the applied prior art
constitutes reversible error. Based upon the above analysis,
we have determined that the examiner’s legal conclusion of
obviousness is not supported by the facts. “Where the legal
conclusion [of obviousness] is not supported by the facts it
cannot stand.” In re Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 1017, 154 USPQ
173, 178 (CCPA 1967).
The Apparatus Claims
When the terms in the claims are written in a “means-
plus-function” format we interpret them as the corresponding
structure described in the specification or the equivalents
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007