Appeal No. 2000-2094
Application No. 08/923,369
higher data transfer rates, and decreasing transfer time, between
the video tape recorder and the disc recorder.
After reviewing the Examiner’s analysis, it is our view that
such analysis carefully points out the teachings of the Lang and
Takada references, reasonably indicates the perceived differences
between this prior art and the claimed invention, and provides
reasons as to how and why the prior art teachings would have been
modified and/or combined to arrive at the claimed invention. In
our opinion, the Examiner's analysis is sufficiently reasonable
that we find that the Examiner has at least satisfied the burden of
presenting a prima facie case of obviousness. The burden is,
therefore, upon Appellants to come forward with evidence or
arguments which persuasively rebut the Examiner’s prima facie case
of obviousness. Only those arguments actually made by Appellants
have been considered in this decision. Arguments which Appellants
could have made but chose not to make in the Briefs have not been
considered [see 37 CFR § 1.192(a)].
Appellants’ arguments in response initially assert that the
Examiner has failed to establish a prima facie case of obviousness
since all of the claim limitations are not taught by the proposed
combination of Lang and Takada. In particular, Appellants contend
(Brief, page 8) that the structure resulting from the combination
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007