Appeal No. 1999-2381
Application No. 08/586,434
by the examiner in claim 15 of the ‘433 application and Takagi
do not include a mechanism rotatably coupling a flip cover and
an end of a support bracket as defined in the claim. Here,
neither Takagi nor Wilcox teach such a mechanism. These
references teach rotatably coupling a flip cover to the end of
the main body of a portable phone.
The Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103
Independent Claim 1
We will not sustain the rejection of claim 1. None of
the prior art applied against claim 1 teaches a flip cover
rotatably secured to a support bracket. As noted in the above
discussion of the rejection of claim 36 over Takagi and
Wilcox, neither reference teaches a mechanism rotatably
coupling a flip cover and an end of a support bracket and the
examiner does not rely on Dent or Pye for such a teaching.
The Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103
Dependent Claims 2-17, 20, 22-35,37-40, 43 and 46-48
Whereas we will not sustain the rejections of sole
independent claims 1 and 36 as obvious over the prior art, we
will not sustain the obviousness rejections of the above
8–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007