Appeal No. 2003-0557
Application 09/121,760
OPINION
For the reasons set forth by the examiner in the answer, we
sustain the rejection of all claims on appeal under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103. Essentially, we agree with the examiner's general
positions with respect to the statement of the rejection and the
responsive arguments in the answer, with the following
embellishments.
At the outset, we note that appellant treats each
independent claim 1, 21, 41 and 42 consistent with the arguments
presented as to representative independent claim 1 on appeal. We
do the same. No arguments are presented as to any dependent
claim.
As noted by the examiner, the image data manager IDM 30 in
Figure 1 of Jamzadeh is taught at column 3, lines 48 to 50 as
comprising "a low-cost general purpose personal computer or a
high performance work station, depending on the level of
performance." We agree with the examiner's reasoning in the
answer that such a general purpose personal computer was a laptop
as representative of what the artisan obviously would have
considered as comprising the noted teaching. Therefore, the
examiner's reasoning as to this well-known device comprising the
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007