Appeal No. 95-4256
Application 08/127,519
(item 3), the examiner’s position is simply that the modification necessary to meet the claim
language would have been obvious. The position is unpersuasive, because it has not been
established that there was some suggestion or incentive to due so. The mere fact that the
combination of Hakamada and Testin could have been modified in the manner suggested by the
examiner does not make the modifications obvious unless the prior art suggested the
desirability of the modification.
As to independent claim 5, the rejection is not sustained essentially for the same
reasons that the rejection of claims 1-4 is not sustained. There is no showing that the teachings
of Hakamata and Testin can be combined. Even assuming that such a combination were
proper, it has not been established that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the
art at the time the invention was made to modify the combined teachings so as to perform with
respect to an electronic device which has been turned off due to noise, the steps of 1)
determining if the electronic device has been turned off, 2) comparing first and second sum
data, and 3) automatically turning on the electronic device.
REVERSED
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007