Appeal No. 1998-3128 Page 10
Application No. 08/624,874
standing alone is clear and unambiguous, there is no
compelling reason to give the expression weight.
For the foregoing reasons, we are persuaded that the
teachings of Austin in combination with the prior art as a
whole would have suggested the limitations of representative
claim 1. Therefore, we affirm the rejection of claims 1-3 and
6-8 as obvious over Austin.
Our affirmances are based only on the arguments made in
the briefs. Arguments not made therein are not before us, are
not at issue, and are considered waived. Next, we address the
obviousness of claims 4, 5, 9, and 10.
Claims 4, 5, 9, and 10
The appellant argues, "there is no disclosure or teaching
related to the features associated with the predetermined time
span." Claims 4 and 5 specify in pertinent part the following
limitations: "storing status information for a predetermined
current time span." Similarly, claims 9 and 10 specify in
pertinent part the following limitations: "storing said status
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007