Appeal No. 1998-2864
Application No. 08/338,235
claimed subject matter. Moreover, appellant does not dispute
that wireless systems “are widely used and preferred for some
applications for advantages of convenience and wiring reduction”
[prinicipal brief-page 8]. Rather, appellant argues that it
would not have been obvious to apply wireless technology to
Kobayashi because Kobayashi is “not one of those applications in
which the use of a wireless system would provide such advantages”
[principal brief-page 8]. In particular, appellant urges that
because Kobayashi’s portable device 25 is used in the immediate
vicinity of the vehicle 1, a wireless system is not more
convenient and, in fact, because of the added cost and
possibility of interference, a non-wireless communication link is
preferred in Kobayashi.
Appellant further distinguishes the instant claimed subject
matter by reason of the processor 26 of the portable monitoring
unit 24 being coupled to the keypad 32 for responding to an
operation of the keypad 32 to select a parameter as to which
measurement data is to be displayed. Appellant points out that
in Kobayashi’s portable diagnosis device 25, processor 28 is
coupled to the keypad 32 for responding to an operation of the
keypad 32 to select a diagnosis mode as to which measurement data
is to be displayed. “This distinguishing feature enables display
-6–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007