Appeal No. 2002-1139
Application No. 09/236,960
It may have been more appropriate to consider whether it would have been
obvious to modify Uchikura, which already has the three sets of data input keys
claimed, in order to provide for the two orthogonal display orientations taught by
Jambhekar. It is appellants’ position that it would not have been obvious to do so
because Uchikura does not need to change the orientation of the display since the lid
opens in such a way that the display is easily seen when using the keyboards in a lid-
open or a lid-closed position. While appellants make a good point regarding no need in
Uchikura to have the same display present data in two orthogonal directions, this fails to
take into account the totality of the teachings of these applied references.
At column 5, lines 7-10, of Jambhekar, it is noted that while this reference
discloses a flip-down lid (e.g., as in Figure 3), other “equally sufficient embodiments of a
moveable housing element 109 may be substituted therefor. These other embodiments
include: a clam shell type housing element, a swivel type housing element and a sliding
type housing element.” The disclosure of a “swivel type housing element,” as well as
the flip-down preferred embodiment, would have led the artisan to understand that
either type of lid may be used and that they are functional equivalents. Since
Jambhekar discloses the use of either type and Uchikura discloses a swivel type, the
artisan would have understood that either reference may use either type of lid. Of
course, if a swivel type lid, of Uchikura’s type, were used in Jambhekar, there would be
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007