Appeal No. 2005-1817 Page 8
Application No. 09/834,499
The examiner's position (answer, page 4) is that Iijima does
not disclose the transponder circuit being separate from the
ignition key. To overcome this deficiency of Iijima, the
examiner turns to Takagi for a teaching of a transponder circuit
separate from the ignition key in a vehicle access system.
Appellants' position (brief, page 10) is that if modified as
advanced by the examiner, Iijima would be unworkable for its
intended purpose and that the Iijima system utilizing a
specialized key suffers from the problems that appellant’s
invention of claim 1 corrects. It is argued (brief, page 11)
that the invention is to be gauged not only by the extent or
simplicity of the physical change, but also by the perception of
the necessity or desirability of making such changes to produce a
new result. It is further asserted (brief, page 12) that it is
the cooperative relationship of the claimed elements that
achieves a novel and unobvious benefit of cost savings when
obtaining duplicate keys, and that Iijima fails to express a
motivation for making the modification suggested by the examiner.
It is argued (brief, page 13) that Iijima requires the
specialized key to prevent car theft by shape forgery of the
mechanical key. It is further argued (id.) that separation of
the transponder from the key is contrary to the express purpose
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007