Appeal No. 2002-1139
Application No. 09/236,960
The examiner contends that Jambhekar does not disclose a QWERTY keyboard
on the inner surface of the lid and on the surface portion of the main body which is
covered by the lid when in the closed position.1 The examiner relies on Uchikura for the
teaching of a telephone keypad mounted on the upper surface of a lid that is hinged to
a main body portion, wherein alphanumeric keys are provided on the other side of the
lid and on the part of the main body portion covered by the lid when the lid is in the
closed position.
The examiner concludes that it would have been obvious to use the teaching of
Uchikura in the communications device of Jambhekar “because it would be much more
convenient to type in messages or notes with the alphanumeric keyboard, rather than to
use a telephone type keypad with limited number of buttons” [answer-page 4].
We will sustain the rejection of claims 1-6 and 10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
because, in our view, the combination of the applied references provides the requisite
prima facie case of obviousness with regard to the instant claimed subject matter.
Independent claims 1 and 10 require three pluralities of data input keys, a first on
the surface portion of the body portion, a second on an inner surface of the lid, and a
third on an outer surface of the lid. Clearly, Jambhekar has no plurality of data input
keys on an inner surface of the lid. The extensions of the keys of keypad 125 through
1 We note that claim 1 does not require the QWERTY keyboard.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007