Appeal No. 2002-0745
Application 08/893,379
persuasiveness of the arguments. See Id.; In re Hedges, 783 F.2d
1038, 1039, 228 USPQ 685, 686 (Fed. Cir. 1986); In re Piasecki,
745 F.2d 1468, 1472, 223 USPQ 785, 788 (Fed. Cir. 1984); and
In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1052, 189 USPQ 143, 147 (CCPA
1976).
Each of the claims rejected under 35 U.S.C. ' 103 depends
from claim 1 or claim 13. All of the examiner=s rejections under
35 U.S.C. ' 103 rely primarily on the teachings of Murakami as
discussed above. The examiner=s findings with respect to
Murakami are erroneous for reasons discussed above. None of the
additionally applied references against these claims overcomes
the deficiencies in Murakami discussed above. Therefore, each of
the examiner=s rejections under 35 U.S.C. ' 103 fails to
establish a prima facie case of obviousness for at least the
limitations recited in claims 1 and 13. Accordingly, we do not
sustain any of the examiner=s rejections under 35 U.S.C. ' 103.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007