Appeal No. 2004-0434
Application No. 09/836,686
music file is transferred to a second portable device from a
first portable device."
Therefore, we will sustain the Examiner's rejection under
35 U.S.C. § 103.
II. Whether the Rejection of Claims 23-24 Under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 is proper?
It is our view, after consideration of the record before us,
that the evidence relied upon and the level of skill in the
particular art would have suggested to one of ordinary skill in
the art the obviousness of the invention as set forth in claims
23-24. Accordingly, we affirm.
With respect to independent claim 23, Appellant essentially
repeats the argument made with respect to claim 10. Appellant
argues, "Berstis does not teach or suggest a controller to
'transmit an indication to the remote portable music player
indicating the number of times the remote portable music player
may transfer the transmitted file' as recited in claim 23." We
find this argument unpersuasive for the reasons noted above with
respect to claim 10.
Therefore, we will sustain the Examiner's rejection under
35 U.S.C. § 103.
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007