Appeal No. 1998-1393 Page 11
Application No. 08/498,306
wants to speak with a subscriber 106', the caller 106
transmits a call request 112 to a central station. The call
request includes data identifying the caller, i.e., caller-ID
data. The central station transfers the caller-ID data to the
subscriber. The reference permits a “called subscriber [to]
decide whether to answer a call received during a meeting,
interview, conference or the like, or during periods when the
called party would rather not be interrupted.” Col. 1, ll.
32-36. In short, Patsiokas teaches the desirability of
providing caller-ID data to the portable units of a
communications system.
The combined teachings of Hasegawa and Patsiokas
(collectively Hasegawa-Patsiokas) would have suggested
providing Patsiokas’s caller-ID data to Hasegawa’s handset.
The motivation to do so would have been to permits a user to
decide whether to answer a call.
The appellant also admits, “Fujioka teaches the pre-
registering of subscribers' telephone numbers so that when any
one of the registered subscribers' number coincides with the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007