Appeal No. 1998-1259
Application No. 08/264,817
call receiver 10 having two or more addresses." We are in
agreement with the examiner that in Connary, personalized
alert signals are stored and presented when an appropriate
address code is detected in the received signal (see col. 1,
lines 49-58 of Connary). Accordingly, the rejection of claims
1-5,7,8 and 13-31 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed.
Turning now to claims 6, 11 and 12, all of which depend
from claim 1, claim 6 requires that the desired communications
signal is an incoming telephone call. Claim 11 sets forth
that the wireless communications device is a radiotelephone.
Claim 12 calls for the wireless communications device to be a
pager. The issue regarding these claims centers around the
types of different wireless communications device that are
taught or suggested by MacDonald and Connary. At the outset,
we note that MacDonald discloses the selective call receiver
to be a pager (col. 1, lines 55-56) as required by claim 12.
In addition, col. 1, lines 15-16 of MacDonald discloses that
"Electronic devices such as selective call receivers have
different methods of alerting a user that a message has been
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007