Appeal No. 09/938,479 Page 2
Application No. 2003-2047
8. A chart recorder, comprising:
a housing;
a backing plate installed in the housing;
multiple movable arms, each having an indicating
tip, each movable arm, being mounted in the housing for
movement in an arc adjacent the backing plate in
response to sensing of a physical parameter by the
chart recorder;
a digitizer mounted in the housing, the digitizer
having a digitizing grid; and
a respective digitizer detectable element mounted
on each movable arm.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Rodgers et al. (Rodgers) 4,210,775 Jul. 01, 1980
Louis et al. (Louis) 4,414,634 Nov. 08, 1983
Claims 8-17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Louis in view of Rodgers.
OPINION
Upon careful review of the respective positions advanced by
appellant and the examiner with respect to the rejections that
are before us for review, we find ourselves in agreement with
appellant’s viewpoint in that the examiner has failed to carry
the burden of establishing a prima facie case of obviousness.
See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444
(Fed. Cir. 1992); In re Piasecki, 745 F.2d 1468, 1471-1472,
223 USPQ 785, 787-788 (Fed. Cir. 1984). Accordingly, we will
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007