Appeal No. 1999-1782
Application 08/853,790
on opening of the container. However, we do not consider that the combination of Kerr and Hayward
would have rendered obvious the particular apparatus recited in claim 1, for several reasons.
In the first place, claim 1 calls for "a random number generator and a display therefor which is
activated each time the mechanism is locked" (emphasis added). The apparatus disclosed by
Hayward does not operate in this manner, since the random number generator is activated when the
mechanism is closed and/or opened, rather than when it is locked. Thus, in Hayward's Fig. 1
embodiment, a random number is generated when knob 34 is moved "to the locking position" (col. 5,
lines 9 to 11), but the mechanism is not locked until a padlock is inserted through hole 54 (col. 4, lines
15 to 20). In Hayward's Fig. 6 embodiment the random number generator has no connection to the
lock, but simply is activated whenever the switch on shutter (door) 100 moves past actuator 126 on the
vehicle body (col. 5, lines 53 to 60).
Second, we agree with appellant that there is nothing in Hayward which would have suggested
to one of ordinary skill that the electronic module having the random number generator be combined in
a case with the locking member of Kerr to form a unitary assembly at the upper corner of the pouch, as
claimed. The random number generator of Hayward is not combined in an assembly with the container
and lock, but rather is either used as a seal, being
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007