Appeal No. 2001-1007
Application No. 08/937,025
forming a database therefrom. Again, we find no clear reasoned analysis of these
teachings to teach or fairly suggest accessing an existing database and determination
of an indication of confidence in the results as recited in the language of independent
claim 31. Similarly, we do not find that the teachings of Amado remedy the deficiencies
in Peters and the examiner has not relied upon Amado beyond the use of plural data
elements. Therefore, we find that the examiner has not established a prima facie case
of obviousness, and we will not sustain the rejection of independent claims 31 and 45.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1, 7, 24, 31, 39, and
45 under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103(a) is reversed.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007