Ex parte JORDAN - Page 11

          Appeal No. 1997-2700                                                        
          Application 08/307,249                                                      

          routing, we find the Examiner’s rationale with regard to the                
          obviousness of providing routing of calls to an operator to be              
          reasonable so as to establish a prima facie case.  In                       
          considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to                  
          take into account not only specific teachings of the reference              
          but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would                  
          reasonably be expected to draw therefrom.  In re Preda, 401                 
          F.2d 825, 826, 159 USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA 1968).  Since the                    
          Examiner’s prima facie case of obviousness has not been                     
          overcome by any persuasive arguments by Appellant, the 35                   
          U.S.C.  103 rejection of dependent claims 4-6, as well as                  
          dependent claims 14-16, 21, and 22 not separately argued by                 
          Appellant, is sustained.                                                    
               Lastly, we consider the Examiner’s 35 U.S.C.  103                     
          rejection of dependent claims 7, 17, and 23, grouped and                    
          argued together by Appellant, as unpatentable over Hunt in                  
          view of Johnson.  The Examiner, as the basis for the                        
          obviousness rejection of these claims, proposes to modify the               
          risk factor teachings of Hunt by adding additional risk                     
          factors such as those taught by Johnson, to increase the                    


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007