Appeal No. 2005-1481
Application 10/236,601
functionally, to Rosen’s spindle assemblies. Even if the artisan
would have found it obvious to use cable wraps as in Petrich with
a display panel as in Rosen, the fair teachings of the references
would not have furnished any motivation to locate the cable wraps
as recited in claims 1 and 8.
Accordingly, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) rejection of independent claims 1 and 8, and dependent
claims 3 through 7 and 9 through 14, as being unpatentable over
Rosen in view of Petrich.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007