Appeal No. 2003-0276
Application 09/432,750
Ruiz v. A.B. Chance Co., 357 F.2d 1270, 1276, 69 USPQ2d 1686,
1690 (Fed. Cir. 2004).
In view of the foregoing, the obviousness rejection of
claim 1 is sustained. The obviousness rejection of claims 2
and 5 is likewise sustained because appellant has chosen to let
these claims stand or fall with claim 1 (brief, page 2).
The obviousness rejection of claims 3 and 4 is reversed
because the examiner’s finding of obvious design choice can not
take the place of a proper finding of prima facie obviousness.
To date, nothing in the record indicates that it would have been
obvious to the skilled artisan to place alphabetic letters in a
keyboard in a right to left sequence (claim 3) as opposed to a
left to right sequence, or to make the middle row of alphabetic
letters read in a sequence that is opposite to the other two rows
of alphabetic letters (claim 4).
DECISION
The decision of the examiner rejecting claims 1 through 5
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is affirmed as to claims 1, 2 and 5, and
is reversed as to claims 3 and 4. Accordingly, the decision of
the examiner is affirmed-in-part.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007