Ex parte SPECTOR - Page 2

               Appeal No. 2000-0580                                                                                               
               Application No. 09/025,347                                                                                         

                      The appellant's invention relates to a phonics training system adapted to teach pre-school                  
               children having a limited vocabulary of words how to spell and read those words.  An                               
               understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim 1, which is                        
               reproduced in the opinion section of this decision.                                                                
                      The sole prior art reference of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the                         
               appealed claims is:                                                                                                
               Corder                                        5,302,132                     Apr. 12, 1994                          
                      The following rejection is before us for review.                                                            
                      Claims 1 and 4-7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.  103 as being unpatentable over                            
                      Reference is made to the brief and reply brief (Paper Nos. 15 and 17) and the final                         
               rejection, first and second advisory actions and answer (Paper Nos. 6, 8, 10 and 16) for the                       
               respective positions of the appellant and the examiner with regard to the merits of this rejection.                
                      In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to the                         
               appellant's specification and claims, to the applied Corder reference, and to the respective                       
               positions articulated by the appellant and the examiner.  For the reasons which follow, we                         
               cannot sustain the examiner's rejection.                                                                           


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007