Appeal No. 1997-3153
Application 08/443,389
Fumitaka with an antenna and receiver (including the
demodulator) as taught by Hahs.
The problem with the examiner’s analysis is that there is
no evidence on this record that a receiver or a demodulator
could operatively be located between the glass sheets of a
windshield, and we cannot find a valid reason why the artisan
would place a receiver between two sheets of glass on a
vehicle windshield. Although claim 10 does not specifically
recite a vehicle windshield, the modification of Fumitaka
proposed by the examiner would require the artisan to place a
receiver for a vehicle between the sheets of glass on the
vehicle windshield. The conclusion is inescapable that the
artisan would find no motivation for placing a receiver in the
windshield of a vehicle. The claimed invention can only
result from an improper attempt to reconstruct the invention
in hindsight.
In summary, we can find no proper motivation for
combining the teachings of Fumitaka, Hahs and Shaw in the
manner proposed by the examiner to support the rejection. The
additional citations of Wen and Sakurai do not overcome the
deficiencies in the basic combination discussed above.
-9-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007