wade
Newbie
Posts: 25
|
 |
questions about 103 rejection
« on: Nov 21st, 2007, 8:40am » |
 Quote  Modify
|
i have looked through some case's filewrappers, and found that a major of the applicant use the "all limitation" rule to overcome the 103 rejection.
and i want to know that the claim is non-obviousness as long as all the limitations of the claim are not taught or suggested by the reference or the combination of the reference documents?
for example, a claim claims a device comprising A, B, C and D. The examiner found two reference documents to reject the claim under 103. but we found that reference 1 discloses A, B, and C ,but not D. reference 2 dose not disclose D too, so can we get a result that the claim is non-obviousness?
i am doubted because the remarks did not mention the "movitation to combine" at all, does'nt a movitation be needed in 103 rejection?
thanks
|
|
 IP Logged |
|
|
|
Forums
Help
Search
Members
Calendar
Login
Register
Reply
Send Topic
Print
Author
Remove