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 |
|
|
|