Appeal No. 2000-1289 Page 7
Application No. 08/604,829
devices and said external communication means enabling
connection alternately between (a) and (b): (a) said second
group of memory devices and said magnetic disk communication
means and between said first group of memory devices and said
external communication means; and (b) said first group of
memory devices and said magnetic disk communication means and
between said second group of memory devices and said external
communication means. . . ." Accordingly, the claim requires
switching between two groups of memories having the same
structure so that the two groups are used alternately.
Having determined what subject matter is being claimed,
the next inquiry is whether the subject matter is obvious.
“In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. Section 103, the examiner
bears the initial burden of presenting a prima facie case of
obviousness.” In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d
1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir. 1993)(citing In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d
1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992)). "’A prima
facie case of obviousness is established when the teachings
from the prior art itself would appear to have suggested the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007