Appeal 2007-0481
Application 10/654,049
spaced apart carbon fibers, and looks to Naboulsi to supply the missing
teaching.
Appellant further argues that “Naboulsi does not disclose a pair of
spaced apart carbon fiber strips coupled to a mobile communication device”
(Reply Br. 4: 32-33). Naboulsi is not relied upon to teach the particular
device to which the squeezeable sensors are coupled. The Examiner cited
Naboulsi to teach that sensors may be made up of the material recited in
Appellant’s claim (Answer 4: 8-10). Naboulsi teaches “carbon-type”
transducers that convert pressure to an electrical signal (Finding of Fact
No. 8).
Appellant further objects to the content of Naboulsi, arguing that “[a]
carbon-type transducer is not carbon fiber strips” (Reply Br. 5: 1-2). As
noted in Finding of Fact No. 4, Appellant attaches no special significance to
the term “carbon fiber.” Appellant’s Specification contains nothing that
would lead the reader to any interpretation other than that Appellant is
employing known (i.e., “old”) carbon fiber materials.
Appellant’s carbon fiber strip sensor operates by allowing current to
flow when moisture and salt on a user’s hand create a short circuit; that is,
current flows in response to pressure (squeezing) (Finding of Fact No. 3). In
Davis, the conductive nature of the human hand causes a current to flow
between first plate 306 and second plate 308 of a capacitance switch 304
(Finding of Fact No. 6). In Naboulsi, a “carbon-type” transducer senses
electrical skin conductivity, and converts pressure to an electrical signal
(Finding of Fact No. 8). Kim shows that the carbon fiber species of carbon
sensor is old in the art (Finding of Fact No. 10).
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013