Appeal No. 2005-0860
Application No. 09/363,728
the terminal includes a connector for coupling the terminal to a
scanner for data collection.
In proposing to combine Bocker and Cargin to reject claim 2
(see page 6 in the answer), the examiner submits that it would
have been obvious in view of Cargin to provide the Bocker
instrument with (1) a rechargeable battery arrangement for the
sake of convenience and (2) a numeric keypad as a data entry
alternative to Bocker’s bar code reader.
The appellants’ contention (see pages 11 and 12 in the
brief) that Bocker and Cheung would not have suggested the second
of these modifications is persuasive. In short, Cargin’s
disclosure of a numeric keypad in a terminal designed for use by
delivery truck drivers to input data relating to deliveries and
invoices would not have suggested the substitution of a like
keypad for the far more rudimentary operational keypad in the
Bocker analyte monitor. In this regard, the only information
desired to be inputted by Bocker is contained in test strip bar
codes adapted to be scanned by Bocker’s bar code reader 28.
Therefore, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) rejection of independent claim 2, and dependent claim 6,
as being unpatentable over Bocker in view of Cargin.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007