Appeal No. 2000-2254
Application No. 08/746,746
communicates with both systems using a cellular transceiver.
Schellinger also discloses that such a radio telephone must be
able to automatically determine which system it is to operate in
[page 3, lines 3-8]. Gillig also teaches the desirability of
operating a radio telephone in both a cordless telephone system
and a cellular telephone system. The Gillig radio telephone,
however, uses a cordless telephone transceiver 110 and a cellular
telephone transceiver 120. We agree with the examiner that it
would have been obvious to broadly replace the single transceiver
of Schellinger with two separate transceivers as taught by
Gillig. Even though Schellinger may use a single transceiver to
reduce the cost of the device, cost savings do not represent a
technological teaching away from the claimed invention. To the
contrary, the applied prior art clearly suggests the use of two
different transceivers when communicating over cordless telephone
systems and cellular telephone systems.
Although appellant argues that Schellinger and Gillig do
not teach the automatic monitoring and selection as claimed, we
do not agree. In fact, we find that each of the applied
references teaches the claimed monitoring and automatic selection
and re-selection of the appropriate telephone system [see for
example, Schellinger, page 9, lines 16-24 and Gillig, Figure 8].
-8-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007