Appeal 2007-1106
Application 10/965,055
1 Fuchida teaches a notebook computer 101, docking stations 102, 104,
2 and a battery housing 103. The battery housing as illustrated has an L-shape
3 that fits into a corresponding recess 145, 202 in a docking station 102, 104
4 (respectively). The battery housing also fits into a corresponding recess 141
5 on the bottom of the computer. The battery pack is only installed in one
6 component at a time, although it can provide power to both the docking
7 station and the computer when installed in the docking station.12
8 Fukushima teaches a docking station 1 with a power supply 60 that
9 provides power for charging a battery in a portable computer 22. Ohnishi
10 shows the use of a six-cell battery13 to supply higher performance, long-term
11 power.14
12 Differences
13 For claims 1-1015 and 21,16 HP notes that Shin does not teach a recess
14 in the battery housing for receiving a portion of the docking station.17 HP
15 further argues that the battery housing of Fuchida does not have a recess for
16 receiving a portion of the docking station.18 While Shin does not have a
12 Fuchida 6:25-29 and 8:1-5.
13 Ohnishi Fig. 6 and 6:18-34.
14 Ohnishi 2:3-10.
15 Although the basis for rejecting claim 5 is slightly different, in that it
relies on Ohnishi for the showing of a six-cell battery, HP relies on its
arguments for claim 1 and does not otherwise separately argue for the
patentability of claim 5. Appeal Br. 10.
16 Although claim 21 is a method claim, and the rejection additionally relies
on Fukushima to show battery charging, HP relies on its "recess" arguments
and does not separately argument for the patentability of claim 21. Appeal
Br. 10.
17 Appeal Br. 7-8.
18 Appeal Br. 8.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013