Appeal No. 2000-0328
Application No. 08/863,345 Page 14
owner to know that the steering wheel lock has been tampered with
if the owner returns to the vehicle after the alarm has
deactivated after a predetermined period of time. From all of
the above, we sustain the rejection of claim 34. We distinguish
claim 34 from claims 2 and 21 because claim 34 does not recite
both activating the tamper indicating means in response to the
sensing means sensing tampering of the vehicle, and that the
timing means includes means for activating the tamper indicating
means after the expiration of the period of time that the alarm
means is activated. Accordingly, the rejection of claim 34, and
dependent claims 35-47 which fall with claim 34, under 35 U.S.C.
103(a) is affirmed.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007