Appeal No. 1998-1491 Page 18
Application No. 08/654,502
second housings." (Appeal Br. at 8.) We first address the
rejection over Hofmann in view of Martiny.
Rejection over Hofmann in view of Martiny
The examiner fails to show that Martiny remedies the
defect of Hofmann. Because Hofmann and Martiny integrate
their circuits into the same housing, we are not persuaded
that teachings from the prior art would appear to have
suggested the claimed limitations of separate two-way
communication circuits contained in separate housings. The
examiner has impermissibly relied on the appellants’ teachings
or suggestions. He has not established a prima facie case of
obviousness. Therefore, we reverse the rejection of claims
30-57 over Hofmann in view of Martiny. We next, and last,
address the rejections over Hofmann in view of Bhagat, Hofmann
in view of Sasaki, or Hofmann in view of Nonami.
Rejections over Hofmann in view of Bhagat, Sasaki, or Nonami
Although Bhagat, Sasaki, or Nonami each teach separate
communication circuits contained in separate housings, the
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007