Appeal No. 1998-0127
Application No. 08/609,670
1992). If that burden is met, the burden then shifts to the
applicant to overcome the prima facie case with argument
and/or evidence. Obviousness is then determined on the basis
of the evidence as a whole and the relative persuasiveness of
the arguments. See Id.; In re Hedges, 783 F.2d 1038, 1039,
228 USPQ 685, 686 (Fed. Cir. 1986); In re Piasecki, 745 F.2d
1468, 1472, 223 USPQ 785, 788 (Fed. Cir. 1984); and In re
Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1052, 189 USPQ 143, 147 (CCPA 1976).
Only those arguments actually made by appellants have been
considered in this decision. Arguments which appellants could
have made but chose not to make in the brief have not been
considered [see 37 CFR § 1.192(a)].
Abare teaches an electrical tape tensioner for
connecting a paper tray which is movable towards and away from
a copier to the mainframe of the copier. The examiner
acknowledges that Abare does not teach the claimed spring
system having a substantially constant force or the partially
open sided C-shaped cable guide and protective channel member.
With respect to the latter feature, the examiner cites Kunkle
as teaching a cable releasing and retracting system having a
partially open sided C-shaped cable guide and protective
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007