Appeal No. 2000-0414 Application No. 08/811,101 and use thereof to automatically start the generation of the line data during the second time period. (See brief at page 11.) Appellants argue that the examiner has provided no teaching of discussion of the use of a start control bit. We agree with appellants, and find that the examiner has not established a prima facie case of obviousness with respect to independent claim 33 and dependent claims 34 and 35. Therefore, we will not sustain the rejection of claims 33-35. CONCLUSION To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1 and 24-35 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed. REVERSED ERROL A. KRASS ) Administrative Patent Judge ) ) ) ) ) BOARD OF PATENT JERRY SMITH ) APPEALS Administrative Patent Judge ) AND ) INTERFERENCES ) ) ) JOSEPH L. DIXON ) Administrative Patent Judge ) jld/vsh 5Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007