Appeal No. 2005-0045 Page 8 Application No. 09/801,093 We turn lastly to the rejection of claims 11 and 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Hall. As we discussed above, it is our view that Hall does not disclose the limitation recited in claim 7 of transmitting a second signal when the first location is equal to a first predetermined location. In addition, it is our view that Hall does not suggest a first predetermined location. As such, we will not sustain this rejection. The decision of the examiner is reversed. REVERSED MURRIEL E. CRAWFORD ) Administrative Patent Judge ) ) ) ) ) BOARD OF PATENT ALLEN R. MacDONALD ) APPEALS Administrative Patent Judge ) AND ) INTERFERENCES ) ) ) ROBERT E. NAPPI ) Administrative Patent Judge ) MEC/jrgPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007