Appeal No. 1997-1379
Application 08/194,748
address unless it is the limitations of the "status request
signals" and "status response signals" in the first and second
transmitting and receiving systems. The Examiner does not
explain why one of ordinary skill in the art would have been
motivated to modify Nakamura to provide a status
request/response since Nakamura is an inventory control system
in an automatic warehouse which does not require such status
signals.
The Examiner also concludes (EA5): "It would have been
obvious to provide Shiomi with the teachings of the
communication system above [of Nakamura as modified by Raj and
Anders]." It is not explained why one of ordinary skill in
the art would have been motivated to use the communication
system of Nakamura, Raj, and Anders (assuming such combination
would have been obvious) in place of the system in Shiomi.
What advantage of the system in Nakamura as modified or
disadvantage of the system of Shiomi would have led one
skilled in the art to make a change?
We do not say that the Examiner's rejection is completely
without basis. For example, Anders discloses that
transmitting and receiving devices may communicate with
- 11 -
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007