Appeal No. 2005-0321
Application No. 09/575,776
Rejection at Issue
Claims 1 through 8 and 10 through 22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being obvious over Silverbrook. Throughout the opinion we make
reference to the brief and the answer for the respective details thereof.
Opinion
We have carefully considered the subject matter on appeal, the rejection
advanced by the examiner and the evidence of obviousness relied upon by the
examiner as support for the rejection. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken
into consideration, in reaching our decision, the appellant’s arguments set forth in
the brief along with the examiner’s rationale in support of the rejection and
arguments in rebuttal set forth in the examiner’s answer.
With full consideration being given to the subject matter on appeal, the
examiner’s rejection and the arguments of appellant and the examiner, and for
the reasons stated infra we will not sustain the examiner’s rejection of claims 1
through 8 and 10 through 22 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Appellant argues, on page 4 of the brief, that the rejection of claim 1 is
improper as Silverbrook does not teach, “a visual display operably connected to
the drive component through the processor for viewing only the file directory
information contained on the data storage device.” On pages 4 and 5 of the
brief, appellant makes similar arguments directed to the “printer” of claim 6, the
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007