Appeal No. 1999-0529
Application 08/588,800
provide us with a factual record which supports his position
on
obviousness. The examiner cannot provide such a record by
merely concluding that claim limitations are obvious without
evidence on the record which supports that conclusion. In
this case, appellants have argued that there is no suggestion
of crossbars in either of the applied references and that the
applied references would have no need for crossbars because of
their different structural properties. The examiner has not
rebutted these arguments, but instead, the examiner has simply
repeated his bare assertion of obviousness without any factual
support. In addition, although the prior art acknowledges
that the walls will have dimensions of width, height and pitch
which are selectable by the user, there is no teaching in the
applied prior art that the three dimensions should have the
specific ranges of values recited in the claim or that the
ranges should be related in the manner set forth in the claim.
We are unpersuaded by this record that the claimed dimensions
are the result of routine experimentation as asserted by the
-11-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007