Ex parte CLAIR - Page 3

          Appeal No. 1997-1304                                                        
          Application 08/084,345                                                      

               Claims 1 through 6 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.  103.               
          As evidence of obviousness, the examiner relies upon Yan in                 
          view of Weyl.                                                               
               Rather than repeat the positions of the appellant and the              
          examiner, reference is made to the briefs and the answers for               
          the respective details thereof.                                             
               We reverse the rejection of claims 1 through 6 under                   
          35 U.S.C.  103.                                                            
               In reviewing the examiner's statement of the rejection at              
          pages 2 and 3 of the answer, the examiner asserts that certain              
          portions of Yan teach the claimed feature of generating linear              
          combinations of the placement vectors.  In the middle of page               
          3 of the answer, however, the examiner then indicates that the              
          reference does not explicitly teach that feature but only                   
          suggests it in a different location in the reference.  In the               
          statement of the rejection as well as the responsive arguments              
          portion of the answer, the examiner does not return to or                   
          effectively rely upon in any manner this reference as a basis               
          to explain the combinability or correlation of its teachings                


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

Last modified: November 3, 2007