Appeal No. 1999-0218
Application 08/691,889
construed is broad enough to read on any numbers or words
which can be used in a conversation to convey the time.
Although none of the claims require that the timepiece
indicate the approximate time using the terms "about" or
"almost," we will address the examiner's argument that "what
the time is called [']about 1 o'clock' almost 1 etc. [sic]
cannot be used to define over the art" (Answer at 4). The
examiner has cited no authority for failing to give weight to
such language in a claim, and we are aware of none.
F. The merits of the § 103 rejection
The claims rejected under § 103 include independent
claims 10 and 19, which recite timepieces for "reciting the
approximate time in words." These claims and dependent claims
3, 8, 9, and 11-18 are collectively rejected for obviousness4
over Beguin in view of (1) allegedly known clocks which give
an audio indication of the time and (2) allegedly known clocks
having a combination of digital and analog displays:
The examiner takes official notice that
analog clocks with a digital display
[display] both accurate time (digital) and
approximate time (analog). It would have
4Claims 3, 8, and 9 depend on claim 1. Claims 11-18
depend on claim 10.
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007