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
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007