Appeal No. 1998-1259
Application No. 08/264,817
MacDonald and Connary can be extended to other wireless
communication devices such as a radiotelephone, and that it
would have been well within the ordinary skill of an artisan
to have utilized the wireless communication devices of
MacDonald and Connary in a radiotelephone environment.
Accordingly, the rejection of claims 6, 11, and 12 under 35
U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed.
Turning now to the rejection of claims 9 and 10, claim 9,
which depends from claim 1, additionally requires that the
controller enable an audible alert generator, to generate an
audible alert pattern as one of a plurality of distinct
audible alert patterns when a desired communication signal is
received, wherein the one of the plurality of distinctive
audible alert patterns and the one of the plurality of
distinctive tactile alert patterns have substantially the same
distinctive alert patterns. Claim 10, which also depends from
claim 1, differs from claim 9 to the extent that a visual
alert is substituted for an audible alert. In MacDonald,
controller 112 controls the operation of the visual display
15
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007