Ex Parte Banas - Page 2




                  Appeal No. 2003-1531                                                                                        Page 2                      
                  Application No. 09/772,274                                                                                                              


                           The appellant's invention relates to a method for alerting a drowsy driver by                                                  
                  lowering the temperature in the vehicle cab or pumping oxygen into the vehicle cab                                                      
                  when it is determined that the driver is drowsy  (specification, pages 1 and 4 to 5).  A                                                
                  copy of the claims under appeal is set forth in the appendix to the appellant's brief.                                                  
                                                                    The prior art                                                                         
                           The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the                                                
                  appealed claims are:                                                                                                                    
                  Kawakami et al. (Kawakami)                     5,488,353                                  Jan.  30, 1996                                
                  Saitoh et al. (Saitoh)                                 5,813,989                                  Sep. 29, 1998                         
                  Brownlee                                                   5,910,773                                  Jun.   8, 1999                    
                                                                   The rejections                                                                         
                           Claims 19 to 21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable                                                     
                  over Kawakami  in view of Saitoh.                                                                                                       
                           Claims 22 to 24 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable                                                     
                  over Kawakami in view of Brownlee.                                                                                                      
                           Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and                                                  
                  the appellant regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the answer                                                     
                  (Paper No. 11, mailed Jul. 30, 2002) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support                                                   
                  of the rejections, and to the brief (Paper No. 10, filed May 21, 2002) and reply brief                                                  
                  (Paper No. 12, filed Aug. 29, 2002) for the appellant's arguments thereagainst.                                                         









Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007