Appeal No. 1999-1551
Application No. 08/547,736
teachings of Krebs would have been led to provide for the advantages taught by Krebs in
the system of Connolly. That is, while Connolly specifies a single handset to which the
paging signal is directed, Krebs indicates that “dispatch communications allow for
communications amongst a group of users, without a need to individually identify each
group member before initiating communication.” Thus, it would have suggested to the
skilled artisan that, sometimes, communication is desired with a group of users rather than
a single user. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to modify Connolly to provide for
communication with a group of users without a need for individually identifying each group
member. While we are cognizant that the details of how appellants establish
communication with a group of users differ from that disclosed by Krebs, independent
claims 1 and 14 are broad enough to cover any transmission of a page request signal of a
type that specifies no single handset and this much is suggested by Krebs.
Thus, we will sustain the rejection of independent claims 1 and 14 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 because the examiner appears to have set forth a prima facie case of
obviousness that has not been overcome by any convincing argument of appellants.
With regard to claim 2, the examiner is, again, reasonable, in pointing out (answer-
page 6) the corresponding elements of Connolly, i.e., the intelligent base station of
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007