Appeal No. 2002-0269
Application No. 09/495,604
the radiating element, in the terms of the instant claims). The slot is provided to vary a
resonant frequency. Murch col. 5, ll. 32-38.
Instant claim 2 sets forth the reactive loading slot as being located somewhere
between the “second side vertical portion” and the “shorting pin.” We find that Murch
teaches, when comparing Figure 14(a) with Figures 2 and 3, that the slot in the first
conducting plate (radiating element) 5 be placed toward the right side of the conducting
plate as shown in Figure 2, near second conductor (“second side vertical portion”) 8.
The combined teachings of Korisch and Murch thus would have suggested that the slot
be near the end of the radiating element towards the second side vertical portion, and
therefore between the second side vertical portion and the balance of the antenna
structure, such as the “shorting pin” taught by Korisch.
We thus find that the teachings of the applied references are sufficient to
establish prima facie unpatentability of the subject matter as a whole of instant claim 2.
The examiner having met this initial burden, the burden of coming forward with evidence
or argument shifted to appellants. After evidence or argument is submitted by an
applicant in response to a rejection, patentability is determined on the totality of the
record, by a preponderance of evidence with due consideration to persuasiveness of
argument. In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir.
1992).
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007