Appeal No. 1998-0746
Application No. 08/511,268
Claims 17 and 31 through 33 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Schmidt in view of Deakin.
Reference is made to the brief and the answer for the
respective positions of the appellant and the examiner.
OPINION
The obviousness rejection of claims 15 through 35 is
reversed.
The examiner states (Answer, page 4) that:
Schmidt discloses in Fig. 4 the claimed
plurality of keys with the numerical keys arranged
in two parallel rows of five and in clockwise
ascending order. The keys are not arranged
immediately adjacent to each other because four keys
are inserted between the rows. Fig. 2b discloses
the keys in a substantially parallel configuration
with the keys immediately adjacent to each other.
One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
invention would have recognized that the specific
arrangement of the key[s] is based on the particular
needs and adaptations for a particular use. It is
clear that the concept of placing keys adjacent to
each other for ease of use because the keys are
related is a well known concept. Further, the
arrangement of keys in an ascending clockwise
fashion is also known and desirable based on the
specific application. Thus, the combination of
these two arrangements for specific purposes would
have been obvious because the combination of the two
arrangements would provide the well known advantages
inherent in each configuration.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007