Appeal No. 1997-3074 Page 8
Application No. 08/392,598
persuasive arguments regarding the unobviousness of the
limitations of claim 4.
With regard to claims 7 and 9, appellants arguments are
directed to the direct coupling and modular aspect of the
scanner/scale units. We find the subject matter of these
claims to have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. 103 for the same
reasons we stated with regard to independent claim 1, supra.
With regard to claim 11, appellants “argue” only that the
cited reference fails to “teach or suggest bar code reader
firmware that is accessible through an aperture in a scanner
housing.” However, as explained, supra, with regard to claim
3, appellants have not addressed the issue of why it would not
have been obvious to provide for such an access to the firmware
in view of the examiner’s obviousness rationale. Accordingly,
appellants’ “argument” is not persuasive.
Finally, with regard to claims 5 and 6, the examiner
relies on Brauneis, in combination with Latimer, wherein
Brauneis teaches the claimed “weigh plate on the frame and
above the scanner.” The examiner sets forth a rationale
[answer-page 6] as to why claims 5 and 6 would have been
obvious over this combination and appellants’ only response
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007