Appeal No. 1998-0147 Application 08/446,278 obviousness with respect to independent claim 17. The rejection of claims 17-22 over Kramer is reversed. Kondo The Examiner does not point out where Kondo discloses or suggests the security means limitation of claim 17. We find no such teaching or suggestion in Kondo. Accordingly, the Examiner has failed to establish a prima facie case of obviousness with respect to independent claim 17. The rejection of claims 17-22 over Kondo is reversed. Claims 46-52 Claims 46-52 do not recite storing the digital data in the memory card according to an address received from the digital signal source as in claims 1, 19, and 15, and do not recite the security means of claim 17. Kramer The principal difference between Kramer and the subject matter of each of independent claims 46-48 and 50 is that Kramer discloses the memory 22 on a card 10 (figure 1) separate from the replay unit (figure 2) having the digital-to-analog converter 62, the filter circuits 70 and - 8 -Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007