Appeal No. 1998-2874
Application No. 08/568,718
switching the cells in a sequential order an equal number of
times, where the starting position for the sequencing is
defined using a random number generator, as claimed in claims
1 and 6” (Emphasis added). In summary, we agree with
appellants’ argument (Brief, pages 5 and 6) that the examiner
has not met his burden of presenting a prima facie case of
obviousness.
DECISION
The decision of the examiner rejecting claims 1 through
10 and 12 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
REVERSED
)
KENNETH W. HAIRSTON )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
JERRY SMITH )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
)
HOWARD B. BLANKENSHIP )
Administrative Patent Judge )
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007