Appeal No. 1998-0101
Application No. 08/253,996
ordinary skill in the art would have been led to the claimed
invention by the reasonable teachings or suggestions found in
the prior art, or by a reasonable inference to the artisan
contained in such teachings or suggestions. In re Sernaker,
702 F.2d 989, 995, 217 USPQ 1, 6 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
"Additionally, when determining obviousness, the claimed
invention should be considered as a whole; there is no legally
recognizable 'heart' of the invention." Para-Ordnance Mfg. v.
SGS Importers Int’l, Inc., 73 F.3d 1085, 1087, 37 USPQ2d 1237,
1239 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (citing W. L. Gore & Assocs., Inc. v.
Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1548, 220 USPQ 303, 309 (Fed.
Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984)).
With regard to the rejection of claim 1, the Examiner
contends that Kinoshita teaches the claimed method of
selecting a preferred communication site from a plurality of
sites using the determined field strength and fuzzy logic.
However, the Examiner acknowledges, Kinoshita does not use a
site preference indicator for each site as claimed. The
Examiner notes that Hurst uses a site preference indicator,
and states:
-4-4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007