Appeal No. 2001-0255
Application 08/733,567
end shrouds three quadrants of the back of the loudspeaker, the
number of trapezoidal cut-outs formed in the back of the
loudspeaker is not of concern, as long as the three quadrants
fully cover the trapezoidal quadrants formed within the inlet
end, and there is no undue interference from the frame
reverberating sound passing therethrough” [column 7, line 62 to
column 8, line 1 (emphasis added)]. We agree with appellant that
this disclosure can only mean that all cut-outs in the frame of
the speaker must be covered by the inlet end of the sound
collecting device. Since Jung does not disclose the structure of
representative claim 1, we do not sustain the examiner’s
rejection of claims 1-4.
We now consider the rejection of claims 5-11 under 35
U.S.C. § 103. In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, it is
incumbent upon the examiner to establish a factual basis to
support the legal conclusion of obviousness. See In re Fine, 837
F.2d 1071, 1073, 5 USPQ2d 1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir. 1988). In so
doing, the examiner is expected to make the factual
determinations set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1,
17, 148 USPQ 459, 467 (1966), and to provide a reason why one
having ordinary skill in the pertinent art would have been led to
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007