Appeal No. 1997-0884
Application 08/260,148
capability of reconfiguration. While it is true that
reconfiguration as a transmitter may not occur, it must be
capable of occurring and, when it is reconfigured, the claim
language must be met. There is no disclosure or suggestion in
Lindmayer that the receiver or transmitter are reconfigurable.
The Examiner states that Lindmayer implies
reconfiguration because once a flag has been set indicating
that a transmitter has been used at least once, and the system
receives the code configured as a receiver, "[t]he code can be
altered so it cannot be 'sent' to anyone attempting to read
the code at latter [sic] time" (EA5). This statement is
erroneous because the receiver is not capable of being
configured as a transmitter to send the stored codes--it just
erases the key code word so it does not work for a particular
lost transmitter. There is no sending of the code word from
the receiver in any sense of the word.
Since Lindmayer does not perform the step of "checking
the flag if the integrated circuit is later configured as a
transmitter," it does not disclose the subsequent step of
"modifying the code if the flag is set." Lindmayer erases a
basic code word portion corresponding to a lost transmitter,
- 7 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007