Appeal 2006-2624
Application 10/223,246
Even though we consider the Examiner’s reasons of combinability at
pages 4 and 5 of the Answer as being weakly-based, we sustain the rejection
as to independent claims 1 and 10 because of the compelling assessment of
the prior art at Appellants’ Specification pages 1 through 3 of the application
as filed. This portion on more than one occasion indicates that long term
exposure to radio frequency signal radiation may damage human tissue. In
the context of cell phones and the like of Nakanishi as noted earlier, it
clearly would have been obvious to the artisan to have utilized some kind of
indication device to inform the user of the power levels or transmitted signal
strength levels of such a portable device. The most straightforward teaching
of the watt meter 112 in Durkota is the statement at column 4, lines 42
through 44: “[a] watt meter element 110 and watt meter 112 are used to
provide local measurements of the transmitted power of the test antenna
102.” This is local to the on board test system 105 within the vehicle or
helicopter in figure 1. Thus, there’s ample evidence in Durkota that it was
known in the art to utilize an indicator element of some kind to convey to a
user the power levels associated with a transmitted signal on an antenna.
Maia is considered cumulative to what has already been taught in Durkota as
to watt meters since the showing at figure 162 of Maia merely shows that a
meter indicating arrangement is inherit in the name “watt meter” used as
element 112 in Durkota.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013