Appeal 2007-0919
Application 10/179,555
The Examiner contends that Vanderheiden teaches the claimed
audible informing step by providing a background sound in the second mode
of operation that becomes silent when the first mode of operation is
subsequently selected (Answer 7). According to the Examiner, by
discontinuing the background sound as the user transitions from the second
mode to the first mode of operation, Vanderheiden teaches audibly
informing the user that the audible feedback function is being disabled (Id.).
The Examiner therefore concludes that it would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art to combine Vanderheiden with Furuhata to yield the
claimed invention.
We affirm.
ISSUES
The pivotal issue on appeal before us is as follows:
(1)Under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a), would one of ordinary skill in the art, at the
time of the present invention, have found that the Vanderheiden-Furuhata
combination renders the claimed invention unpatentable when Vanderheiden
teaches disabling the background sound as the user transitions from a second
mode to a first mode of operation?
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013