Appeal 2007-0647
Application 10/421,366
receiving a reservation request and notification
instructions from the telematics control
unit; and
sending a notification message indicating available
seating at the restaurant, the message
sent to the telematics control unit in accordance
with the notification instructions.
THE REFERENCES
Brooks US 5,203,017 Apr. 13, 1993
Miyahira US 5,321,848 June 14, 1994
Camaisa US 5,845,263 Dec. 1, 1998
Visconti WO 01/75735 A1 Oct. 11, 2001
Bigus US 2002/0013730 A1 Jan. 31, 2002
August US 2002/0143638 A1 Oct. 3, 2002
DiPietro US 2002/0156682 A1 Oct. 24, 2002
Witkowski US 2002/0197955 A1 Dec. 26, 2002
Wilson US 6,813,609 B2 Nov. 2, 2004
THE REJECTIONS
Claims 1-5, 7-8, 14-18, 20, 21, 23-28, 30-41, 43, and 45-52 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over the teachings
of August in view of DiPietro, and further in view of Witkowski.2
2 See note 1 supra. The Examiner has indicated that claim 19 would be
allowable if rewritten in independent form, even though the Examiner’s
rejection heading on page 4 of the Answer includes claim 19 (see Answer 4
and 11). We consider the rejection heading on page 4 of the Answer to be a
typographical error. We further note that no rejection for claim 19 is set
forth in the pages that follow the rejection heading on page 4 of the Answer
(Answer 4-8).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013