Appeal No. 2002-2295
Application 08/988,457
An obviousness analysis commences with a review and
consideration of all the pertinent evidence and arguments. “In
reviewing the [E]xaminer’s decision on appeal, the Board must
necessarily weigh all of the evidence and arguments.” Oetiker,
977 F.2d at 1445, 24 USPQ2d at 1444. “[T]he 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).
Appellants argue that neither LaPorta nor Grube teaches or
suggests a central station that transfers application software
data invoked by a mobile unit by using radio base stations
identified from the registration information received from the
mobile units and stored in a registered database, as recited in
independent claims 1 and 11. See pages 5 through 7 of the brief.
We note that Appellants’ claim 1 recites
storing the registration information in a registration
database located at the central station, such that the
registration database stores information identifying the
particular radio base station currently communicating with
each of the plurality of mobile units;
receiving a request to transfer data to a selected
group of the plurality of mobile units; and
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007