Appeal No. 2000-1520
Application No. 08/768,715 Page 6
Appellant asserts (brief, page 8 and reply brief, page 2)
that merely because Figa teaches LIFO and FIFO does not result in
the conclusion that it would be obvious to substitute the LIFO
arrangement of Figa for the FIFO arrangement of Hirai.
Appellant further asserts that there is no teaching or suggestion
in the references to support the combination, and that the
specific arrangement proposed by the examiner appears to be
solely for the purpose of meeting the claim limitations.
Appellant further asserts that Hirai "teaches away from the
substitution of the figure of Figa et al. '496." Appellant does
not present any specific arguments as to why appellant believes
that Hirai teaches away from the substitution of LIFO for FIFO by
the examiner. Nor does appellant provide any specific arguments
to support appellant's position that there is no teaching or
suggestion to combine the teachings of Hirai and Figa as advanced
by the examiner.
From our review of Hirai, we find that Hirai stores
information in memory 18, including the telephone number, (figure
5) in the order that the call was received i.e., (col. 13, lines
34-38). As shown in figure 6A, when the subscriber pushes down
the displaying switch 25, telephone numbers Nt are read out from
memory circuit 18 in the order of incoming calls, under the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007