Appeal No. 1998-3403
Application No. 08/336,342
disclosed by Kikinis. Both Kikinis and Swindler concern docking
station apparatus and a conclusion of obviousness may be made from
the knowledge and common sense of the person of ordinary skill in
the art. In re Bozek, 416 F.2d 1385, 1390, 163 USPQ 545, 549
(CCPA 1969).
Lastly, we agree with the positions taken by the examiner at
pages 9 and 10 of the answer, and adopt them as our own, with
respect to software means for providing the necessary drive
support (emphasis added, claims 4 and 9) and a PCMCIA controller
located on a main
board of the docking station (claims 5, 10 and 19)1.
Summary
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection
with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR § 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
STANLEY M. URYNOWICZ, JR. )
Administrative Patent Judge )
1 Claim 19 depends from claim 18, which has been canceled. It is not considered
that claim 19 would be allowable over the prior art irrespective of which other
appealed claim it could properly be made to depend from.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007