Appeal No. 2006-1221
Application No. 09/846,995
potential for reduced user terminal performance” [answer, page 3].
Maveddat teaches when an outage event is triggered, a short SMS message is sent to
all impacted subscribers [col. 8, line 49]. Maveddat explicitly discloses: “The SMS message
then indicates that an outage event will occur at a certain point in time” [col. 8, line 52]. We
therefore find that Maveddat’s SMS message clearly informs a user of a potential for reduced
user performance, as claimed.
Maveddat teaches that the SMS message transmitted to mobile subscriber 106 via
processing system 118 is generated by intelligent peripheral 116 that “determines when the
event will occur using an automatic forecasting algorithm” [col. 8, lines 38-53].
However, we agree with the examiner that a broad but reasonable construction of the
claim language (i.e., “responsive to at least one criterion having been met for activating an
indicator for informing a user of a potential for reduced user terminal performance”) reads
upon the inherent controller function performed by the mobile subscriber 106 handset (i.e.,
user terminal) that activates (i.e., displays) a message to mobile subscriber 106.
IV. Appellants argue that there is no suggestion or motivation to combine Maveddat with
Rydbeck.
In the rejection of claims 1, 10, and 19, the examiner asserts that “it would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the
invention of Maveddat, and have it activate an indicator, as taught by Rydbeck, thus allowing
the user to be notified of low link margin” [answer, page 4].
There must be a teaching or suggestion within the prior art, within the nature of the
-8-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007