Appeal No. 1998-3362
Application No. 08/516,773
Montefiore Hosp., 732 F.2d 1572, 1577, 221 USPQ 929, 933 (Fed.
Cir. 1984). These showings by the Examiner are an essential
part
of complying with the burden of presenting a prima facie case
of
obviousness. Note In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24
USPQ2d
1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
With respect to the obviousness rejection of both of the
appealed independent claims 1 and 15 based on Katayama,
Appellants assert the Examiner’s failure to establish a prima
facie case of obviousness since all of the claim limitations
are not taught or suggested by the applied Katayama reference.
In particular, Appellant contends (Brief, page 6) that
Katayama has no disclosure of the serial reading of video data
from a selected bit plane of a frame buffer, as well as
lacking any disclosure of the formation of the serially read
data into groups.
After reviewing the disclosure of the Katayama reference
in light of the arguments of record, we are in agreement with
Appellant’s position as stated in the Brief. In making the
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007