Appeal No. 2006-2679
Application No. 10/359,882
advantageous properties over the prior art that are simply not commensurate with the
scope of the subject matter that is claimed, to be not persuasive.
With respect to the rejection of claim 15 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Sawaya, Asano, and Valenzona, we note that appellants hold there
was no suggestion from the prior art to provide a “writing implement receptacle” with a
telephone message printing apparatus as described by Sawaya. We disagree, and
refer to the examiner’s rejection. Moreover, for all that the language requires, display
108 (Sawaya Fig. 1) is a writing implement receptacle, in that one could rest a pen,
pencil, or stylus lengthwise across the display.
We therefore sustain the rejection of claims 1-14 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Sawaya and Asano and the rejection of claims 15 and 16 under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Sawaya, Asano, and Valenzona.
CONCLUSION
The rejection of claims 1-16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed.
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007