Appeal No. 2003-1459 Page 6
Application No. 09/534,469
Claims 1 to 25
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 1 to 25 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Dockes or the rejection of claims 1 to 25 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Camaisa.
Independent claim 1 specifies that the imaging device includes a processor
controlled by firmware stored in a firmware memory, and further includes the step of
"configuring the imaging device by storing in the firmware memory, customized firmware
which provides the selected features." Both Dockes and Camaisa fail to teach or
suggest these limitations of claim 1. The examiner has not presented any evidence
establishing the obviousness of modifying either Dockes or Camaisa to arrive at the
subject of claim 1. Thus, a proper prima facie case of obviousness of claim 1 has not
been established and the rejections of claim 1, and claims 2 to 25 dependent thereon,
are reversed.
Claims 26 to 34
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 26 to 34 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Dockes or the rejection of claims 26 to 34 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Camaisa.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007