Appeal No. 1998-2540
Application No. 08/214,707
discussed above. Therefore, we also do not sustain the
rejection of claim 2 based on the collective teachings of
Takeuchi, Wash and Ueno.
We now consider the rejection of claims 9, 16, 17 and 21
based on the teachings of Takeuchi, Wash and Blancato. The
deficiencies of the Takeuchi-Wash combination have been
discussed above. We also agree with appellants that the image
modifications taught by Blancato have absolutely nothing to do
with a filing system as taught by Takeuchi, and there would be
no motivation for the artisan to use the teachings of Blancato
to modify the systems of Takeuchi or Wash. Therefore, we do
not sustain the rejection of claims 9, 16, 17 and 21 based on
the collective teachings of Takeuchi, Wash and Blancato.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007