Appeal No. 1997-1011
Application No. 08/250,631
(picture tube 15). Takarada, however, includes a single type of
character data (which appears to be for close captioning) and
does not describe source information as the character data.
Claim 1, on the other hand, requires two types of icons, close
captioning and source data. Niioka discloses providing a
broadcast wave receiving system with a display of channel
receiving information, such as the call signs of the stations, to
inform the user of the name or call sign of a channel as it is
received. Niioka, however, does not transmit the call signs with
the broadcast. Rather, Niioka presets and stores the information
at the receiver and compares the frequency of the received
broadcast with frequency data stored with the call signs.
We find no motivation in either reference for transmitting
the network identifiers with the broadcast signals, as the
disclosure of Niioka is limited to presetting such information at
the receiver. Additionally, neither reference discloses
transmitting both close captioning and source data as the
character data, as Takarada transmits only one type of character
data and Niioka does not transmit any type of icon or character
data. Accordingly, the examiner has failed to establish a prima
facie case of obviousness. Therefore, we cannot sustain the
rejection of claims 1 through 10, 14, 15, and 19 through 21.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007