Appeal No. 1998-0441
Application 08/713,089
circuits. As noted in the analysis of claims 2, 7, 12,
and 17, the Examiner has merely cited seven references with
no particular reasoning of how they should be combined.
Since the Examiner has failed to establish a prima facie
case of obviousness as to claim 7, we conclude that the
Examiner has likewise failed to establish a prima facie case
of obviousness with respect to claim 19. The rejection of
claim 19 is reversed.
CONCLUSION
The rejections of claims 2, 3, 7-9, 11-14, 16, 17, and
19 are reversed.
REVERSED
JERRY SMITH )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF
PATENT
LEE E. BARRETT ) APPEALS
Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
) INTERFERENCES
- 13 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007