Appeal No. 2006-1589
Application No. 10/082,912
III. Appellants argue that the instant specification defines portable networking device 130 as
containing a “wireless transceiver capable of communicating both with Internet access device
120 and with an onboard system contained in mobile vehicle 140” [brief, page 12; see also
specification, page 5, lines 18-20, emphasis added]. Appellants further argue that Kiel does not
teach the activity monitoring unit includes a modem, as argued by the examiner in the answer
[reply brief, page 8; see also answer, page 5]. Appellants argue that Kiel actually teaches the
activity monitoring unit can be combined in an integral unit with the modem [reply brief, page
8].
The examiner responds that the instant specification discloses that portable networking
device 130 may be, for example, a personal data assistant (PDA), a cellular phone with memory
capability, or any other appropriate device [answer, page 5, emphasis added; see also instant
specification page 5, lines 16-18]. The examiner further notes that the specification discloses
that portable networking device may contain “a wireless transceiver capable of communicating
both with Internet access device and with an onboard system” [answer, page 5; see also instant
specification page 5, lines 18-20, emphasis added]. The examiner asserts that appellants’ use of
the qualifier “may” in the specification does not imply an absolute feature [answer, page 5]. The
Examiner maintains that Kiel's activity monitoring unit anticipates the claimed portable
networking device, noting that Kiel teaches that the activity monitoring unit includes a modem
and interfaces with the Internet [answer, page 5; see also Kiel, ¶ 0037].
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007