Appeal No. 1996-3178
Application 08/407,275
Rejection of Claims 2, 3, and 7 to 9 Under 35 U.S.C. § 103:
We turn next to appellants’ argument (Brief, page 5) that there is no suggestion to combine
Banks with Saliga or to combine Banks with Saliga and Thomas. Appellants aver that the examiner has
not provided a reference to show that it would have been obvious to use a light source to locate keys.
We cannot agree. Instead, we agree with the examiner that Banks teaches
a display means or LED light as an indicator to indicate to a user which key slot contains a requested
key (see column 6, lines 7 to 10). As to motivation to combine the indicator teaching of Banks with
Saliga and Thomas, we note our agreement with the examiner (Answer, page 4) that using an indicator
is a quick way to notify a user about the location of a selected item/key. Furthermore, we note that it
would have been common sense to use a light to locate the selected item/key since locating an item/key
by row and column on a character display is tedious and time consuming. See In re Bozek, 416 F.2d
1385, 1390, 163 USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA 1969) (standing for proposition that conclusion of
obviousness may be made from common knowledge and common sense of person of ordinary skill in
art without any specific hint or suggestion in particular reference); In re Preda, 401 F.2d 825, 826, 159
USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA 1968) and In re Shepard, 319 F.2d 194, 197, 138 USPQ 148, 150 (CCPA
1963) (both standing for proposition that not only specific teachings of reference but also reasonable
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007