Appeal No. 2000-2291
Application No. 08/777,721
of references, the Examiner must identify a reason, suggestion,
or motivation which would have led an inventor to combine those
references. Pro-Mold & Tool Co. V. Great Lakes Plastics, Inc.,
75 F.3d 1568, 1573, 37 USPQ2d 1626, 1629, (Fed. Cir. 1996).
However, “the Board must not only assure that the requisite
findings are made, based on evidence of record, but must also
explain the reasoning by which the findings are deemed to support
the agency’s conclusion.” In re Lee, 277 F.3d 1338, 1344, 61
USPQ2d 1430, 1434 (Fed. Cir. 2002).
Upon a review of Hayashi, we find that the reference relates
to a facsimile apparatus that incorporates a cordless telephone
set. As depicted in Figures 4 and 5, after the CPU responds to
the receipt of an incoming signal (step a1), a CNG facsimile
request signal is transmitted from the caller (step a3) which
causes the relay switch to connect the telephone line to the
facsimile apparatus (col. 6, lines 20-33). If voice
communication is requested by the caller, a ringing burst is
generated (step a5) and emitted from the remote unit (col. 6,
lines 34-41). Therefore, Hayashi does not send any signal to the
cordless unit when a facsimile signal is received. In fact, the
ringing burst is generated only when no facsimile reception
signal is detected and the external line is to be transferred to
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007