Appeal No. 1999-0246
Application 08/641,629
have made another argument we find persuasive, which is that
the examiner failed to explain why it would have been obvious
to provide the key interface menu and maintenance menu under
the specific conditions recited in the claim. The rejection
of claim 1 is therefore reversed, as are the rejection of its
dependent claims 2-6, 9, 13, and 14, as is the rejection of
independent claim 8, which is deficient in the same respect as
claim 1.
REVERSED
)
JOHN C. MARTIN )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
JERRY SMITH )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
)
JOSEPH F. RUGGIERO )
Administrative Patent Judge )
jcm/vsh
- 11 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007