Appeal 2007-1598
Application 10/071,731
Appellant's invention relates generally to programmable devices for
customizing an individual's environment. See Specification 1:4-6. Claim 1
is illustrative of the claimed invention, and it reads as follows:
1. A method of obtaining information regarding an
environment for an individual, having preferred modalities and
engaged in activity, using a programmable device, said method
comprising the steps of:
sensing at least one psychomotor behavioral element of the
activity engaged by the individual; and
determining the preferred modalities of the individual based on
the psychomotor behavioral element of the activity engaged by the
individual.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the Examiner in
rejecting the appealed claims are:
Breese US 5,987,415 Nov. 16, 1999
Mizokawa US 6,230,111 B1 May 08, 2001
Claims 1 through 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Breese in view of Mizokawa.
We refer to the Examiner's Answer (mailed December 11, 2006) and
to Appellant's Brief (filed October 30, 2006) and Reply Brief (filed February
12, 2007) for the respective arguments.
SUMMARY OF DECISION
As a consequence of our review, we will reverse the obviousness
rejection of claims 5 and 7 through 9 and affirm the obviousness rejection of
claims 1 through 4, 6, and 10 through 18.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013