Appeal No. 2000-0807
Application No. 08/971,647
Reference is made to the Examiner's Answer (Paper No. 19,
mailed November 10, 1999) for the examiner's complete reasoning
in support of the rejection, and to appellant's Brief (Paper
No. 18, filed August 30, 1999) and Reply Brief (Paper No. 20,
filed November 23, 1999) for appellant's arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the claims, the applied prior
art references, and the respective positions articulated by
appellant and the examiner. As a consequence of our review, we
will reverse the obviousness rejection of claims 1 through 12 and
15.
Independent claim 1 recites, in pertinent part, "a
microphone mounted on the strap" and "an earphone mounted within
a finger thimble." More specifically, the finger thimble is
dimensioned to be insertable into the ear to
effectively shield the ear from extraneous sounds,
. . . said finger of the hand being an index finger,
and said finger thimble being dimensioned to conform to
the index finger so that it is insertable into the ear
of the user.
Thus, claim 1 requires a microphone on the wristband or strap and
an earphone mounted within a thimble which is dimensioned to fit
into the user's ear.
The examiner rejects claim 1 over Saksa and Blonder. The
examiner asserts (Answer, page 3) that "Saksa teaches all
features claimed except for the location of the microphone," and
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007