Appeal No. 2001-2241
Application No. 08/928,555
the individual teachings. The examiner maintains that claims 15-38 introduce no
limitations of significance in light of the discussion. (See answer at page 5.) We
assume that this is why the examiner has never addressed these claims. We find that
the examiner has not established a prima facie case of obviousness, and we cannot
sustain the rejection of independent claims 6, 15, 20, 27, 33, and 34 and dependent
claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Microsoft or Wright in view of Bertram.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims1-5 and 10-14 under
35 U.S.C. § 102 over Microsoft and Wright is reversed, the decision of the examiner to
reject claims 6-9 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Microsoft in view of Bertram is reversed,
and the decision of the examiner to reject claims 6-9 and 15-38 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
over Wright in view of Bertram is reversed.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007