Appeal No. 2003-0276
Application 09/432,750
it, and Yoshida’s desire to provide the most easily usable
keyboard layout for the handicapped, we agree with the examiner
(answer, pages 3 and 4) that it would have been manifestly
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the Yoshida
alphabetic keyboard layout (i.e., Figures 14 and 15) in Grimmett
to provide a handicapped user with the most efficient and easily
usable keyboard layout. The modified Grimmett keyboard would
possess a spacer bar, functions keys as well as the capability
to switch between a QWERTY keyboard layout and an alphabetic
keyboard layout as claimed.
Appellant’s arguments throughout the briefs that any
modification of the Grimmett keyboard away from the specific
placement of the I and Q keys would defeat Grimmett’s purpose of
providing an easily usable keyboard are not convincing of the
nonobviousness of the claimed invention because the combined
teachings of the references expressly suggest that the keyboard
layout in Yoshida is the best alphabetic keyboard layout for
handicapped users. Our reviewing court has consistently stated
that a court or the examiner may find a motivation to combine
prior art references in the nature of the problem to be solved.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007