Appeal No. 95-3292
Application 08/115,975
The appealed claims stand rejected as follows:
(a) claims 1, 5, 7 and 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
Ichikawa, Fujisaku and Ide.2
(b) claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Ichikawa, Fujisaku, Ide
and Nakajima. 3
The respective positions of the examiner and the appellants with regard to the propriety of
these rejections are set forth in the final rejection (Paper No. 25), the examiner's answer (Paper
No. 31) and the appellants' brief (Paper No. 30).
Appellants' Invention
Appellants disclose a selective call paging receiver having first and second displays
positioned on first and second surfaces of a housing. The first display is relatively small and is for
displaying a first type message having a message length less than a predetermined threshold length
and the second display is larger for displaying a second type message having a message length
greater than the predetermined threshold length. The first display is deactivated when the second
type message is received. After the second type message has been displayed, the second display is
2Although Ide is not mentioned in the examiner’s formal statement of the rejection of claim 5, it is
apparent that this reference is applied to the claim for the same reason as it is applied to the other claims
of this group. Ide was applied against claim 1 and in the final rejection at page 5, the examiner stated,
“Claim 5 differs from claim 1 in that claim 5 further includes a transmitter with a decoding scheme prior
to transmitting any signals.” Thus, the appellants had notice of Ide with respect to claim 5.
3Although Ide is not mentioned in the examiner’s formal statement of the rejection of dependent claim
2, it is apparent that Ide is applied against claim 2 for the same reason as it is applied to claim 1, from
which it depends.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007