Appeal No. 97-2119
Application No. 08/263,825
OPINION
The obviousness rejection of claims 1 through 14 is
reversed.
Carlson discloses a programmable timer for selectively
timing the occurrence of electrically controllable events
(Abstract; column 1, lines 13 through 18; column 1, lines 40
through 43; column 6, lines 8 through 12; column 6, lines 53
through 60).
Based upon the teachings of Carlson, the examiner is of
the opinion that “[t]he selection of a particular time period
for producing the output signal would be an obvious matter of
choice to one skilled in the art” (Answer, page 4) and that
“no patentable subject matter is present in applicant’s [sic]
claims, as the timer of the patent is capable of providing a
signal at lunar transit time, if such selection is desired”
(Answer, page 5).
Appellants argue (Brief, page 7) that:
[T]he Examiner is confusing what Carlson’s timer is
capable of with what it would be obvious to do with
Carlson’s device. The appropriate question is
whether it would be obvious to set Carlson’s device
to go off at some relation to lunar transit time and
then repeat it again at some relation to lunar
transit time some twenty four hours fifty one
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007