Appeal No. 2000-1663
Application No. 08/691,663
used against its teacher." W. L. Gore & Assoc. v. Garlock, Inc.,
721 F.2d 1540, 1553, 220 USPQ 303, 312-13 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert.
denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984). It is essential that "the
decisionmaker forget what he or she has been taught at trial
about the claimed invention and cast the mind back to the time
the invention was made . . . to occupy the mind of one skilled in
the art who is presented only with the references, and who is
normally guided by the then-accepted wisdom in the art." Id.
Therefore, we will not sustain this rejection as it is
directed to claim 1. We will, likewise, not sustain the
rejection as it is directed to claims 4, 10 and 21 as these
claims are dependent on claim 1.
In regard to claim 17, we note that the appellants have not
specifically argued the patentability of this claim. We also
note that claim 17 does not require that the data communication
assistance request to a remote location be transmitted by the
fob. Rather, claim 17 requires that the controller supported on
the vehicle sends an assistance request via a transmitter
supported on the vehicle based upon the receipt of a wireless
signal from said remote activation button.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007