Appeal No. 96-2995
Application 08/383,608
system while the driver is driving the bus [English abstract].
The obvious conclusion, one of ordinary skill in the art would
here drawn from this disclosure, is that the driver is busy
and his hands are needed to be free for normal vehicle control
actions, while the message playback switch is being activated
by the handgrip of the driver.
Still further, Appellant argues that the "combination
disclosed by applicant should not be thought to be obvious
under 35 U.S.C. § 103" [brief, page 12].
We note that this is merely a conclusionary statement.
No specific facts or arguments in regard to the instant
application are discussed. Therefore, we need not address it
any further than already discussed above.
For the above rationale, we affirm the rejection of claim
1 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Kawana in
view of Bazille and Rakos.
With respect to claims 2, 3, 5, 8, 9 and 11, they all
stand or fall together. Thus, we also affirm the rejections
of these claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Kawana in view of Bazille and Rakos.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007