Appeal No. 1999-1515
Application No. 08/451,719
(1988); Ashland Oil, Inc. v. Delta Resins & Refractories,
Inc.,
776 F.2d 281, 293, 227 USPQ 657, 664 (Fed. Cir. 1985), cert.
denied, 475 U.S. 1017 (1986); ACS Hosp. Sys., Inc. v.
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).
We consider first the Examiner’s obviousness rejection of
independent claims 18, 24, 33, and 39, all of which include
the claimed feature of establishing a duplicate two-way call
to effect a seamless transfer of communication between base
stations. Appellants assert (Brief, page 8) that the Examiner
has failed to establish a prima facie case of obviousness
since none of the applied references suggest any reason why
they might be combined.
After careful review of the applied prior art in light of
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007