Appeal No. 2006-1589
Application No. 10/082,912
[¶0036]. Kiel further discloses that a message indicating an insufficient credit balance is
displayed to the user [¶0043, see also step 328, Fig. 3B]. Both of these operations require an
operative coupling between activity monitoring unit 116 and onboard CPU 114, as illustrated by
the direct connection shown in Fig. 1.
Accordingly, we agree that claim 1 reads upon the Kiel reference in the manner relied
upon by the examiner.
II. Appellants argue that instant portable networking device 130 and instant onboard system
141/142 are not the same object and are entirely separate devices [brief, page 12, reply brief,
page 5]. Appellants further assert that Kiel merely discloses a single device, specifically a client
communication device 102 that is provided with an integral activity monitoring unit 116 [brief,
page 13, reply brief, pages 5-7].
In response, the examiner notes that Kiel teaches the activity monitoring unit and the
client communication device may be embodied as separate devices. The examiner points out that
Kiel teaches the client communication device “is connected to an activity monitoring unit”
[answer, page 4; see also Kiel, ¶¶ 0013 and 0025, emphasis added].
We note that Kiel explicitly teaches that the communication device is installed with, or is
connected to, the activity monitoring unit [¶0009, line 5, emphasis added]. We therefore agree
with the examiner that the scope of Kiel’s disclosure encompasses, in at least one embodiment, a
discrete communication device that is operatively connected to a discrete activity monitoring
unit.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007