Ex Parte RAPELI - Page 2




              Appeal No. 2001-1530                                                                                            
              Application No. 08/981,676                                                                                      


                      Appellant's invention relates to a keyboard and key and telephone apparatus                             
              with such a keyboard.  An understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading                          
              of exemplary claim 12, which is reproduced below.                                                               
                      12. A key for inputting characters said key having a face adapted to be                                 
                      engaged for actuation of said key, said key being arranged to correlate to                              
                      a character in response to pressing once on said face of said key, said                                 
                      key being arranged to move when pressed in a direction generally normal                                 
                      to said face, said key having a main contact pad which is always activated                              
                      when said key is pressed in said direction and at least one edge contact                                
                      pad which is activated, in addition to the main contact pad, when said key                              
                      is pressed in said direction at a point of said edge contact pad or close to                            
                      said point, wherein an activation by said key of predetermined contact                                  
                      pads corresponds to an inputting of a predetermined character, and                                      
                      wherein said main contact pad and said at least one edge contact pad are                                
                      separate and spaced from one another.                                                                   

                      The prior art of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the appealed                           
              claims is as follows:                                                                                           
              Strauch et al. (Strauch)             5,861,823                     Jan. 19, 1999                                


                      Claims 3-5, 10-12, 14-16 and 18-23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as                              
              being anticipated by Strauch.  Claims 6 and 9 stand rejected under U.S.C. § 103 as                              
              being unpatentable over Strauch.                                                                                


                      Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and                           
              appellant regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the examiner's                             

                                                              2                                                               





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007