Appeal No. 2001-2697
Application No. 08/770,048 Page 11
11). Because the teachings of McDonald and the facts established
by the taking of Official notice relate to page layouts for a
document using desktop publishing software, we find that the desk
top publishing composition types do not clearly suggest adding
the composition types to the image of Zelten. We see no
suggestion, and no convincing line of reasoning has been provided
by the examiner, that would have suggested to an artisan, the
adding of composition types for a page layout of a document, to
the scanner of Zelten for application of the composition types on
the image in the scanner.
From all of the above, we find that the examiner has failed
to establish a prima facie case of obviousness of claim 2.
Accordingly, the rejection of claim 2, and claims 3 and 5,
dependent therefrom, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007