Appeal No. 2002-2169 Page 19
Application No. 09/163,286
Here, although we do not disagree that some features of theodolites are
conventional in the art, the examiner fails to allege, let alone show, that the combined
teachings of the references would have suggested the aforementioned limitations. We
will not "resort to speculation," In re Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 1017, 154 USPQ 173, 178
(CCPA 1967), as to such a suggestion. Therefore, we reverse the obviousness
rejection of claim 2.
Claim 3
The appellants argue, "[t]he cited references fail to teach or suggest," (Reply Br.
at 5), "further limitations regarding location of the satellite navigation receiver with a
radio link communication to the reference oscillator." (Reply Br. at 5.) The examiner
offers no response to the argument.
Claim 3 specifies in pertinent part the following limitations: "the satellite
navigation receiver is remotely located and communicates via a radio link to the
reference oscillator. . . ." The examiner fails to allege, let alone show, that the
combined teachings of the references would have suggested the aforementioned
limitations. Again, we will not "resort to speculation," Warner, 379 F.2d at 1017, 154
USPQ at 178, as to such a suggestion. Therefore, we reverse the obviousness
rejection of claim 3.
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007