Appeal No. 1998-0746
Application No. 08/511,268
Schmidt, neither embodiment can be modified so that the
numeric keys are arranged in first and second immediately
adjacent straight parallel rows of five keys each in clockwise
ascending order so that no other actuable keys are disposed
between the parallel rows of numeric keys as claimed. Thus,
in the absence of a convincing line of reasoning by the
examiner for modifying the two embodiments in Figures 2b and 4
of Schmidt, we agree with the appellant (Brief, page 7) that
“the use of such impermissible hindsight is not adequate
motivation to arrive at the present invention and . . . the
Examiner has improperly combined the two distinct embodiments
of Schmidt in order to meet the limitations of the claimed
invention.” As a result thereof, the obviousness rejection of
claims 15, 16, 18 through 30, 34 and 35 is reversed.
Turning next to the obviousness rejection of claims 17
and 31 through 33, appellant argues (Brief, page 16) that:
Deakin discloses a telephone desk stand having
numeric keys arranged in two vertical columns in
counterclockwise ascending order and placed adjacent
to their associated letters. In contrast thereto,
the keyboard of Schmidt includes separate alphabet
and numeric keypads for entry of alphabet and
numeric data. Appellant respectfully submits that
it would not be obvious to incorporate the numeric
key and letter association of Deakin with a computer
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007