Appeal No. 97-1384
Application 08/068,357
broadcasting of the sending transceiver ID, or serial number.
Therefore, when the receiver is sending a reply signal, it is
acting in a sending unit capacity and the art fairly suggests
including the sending unit ID in that signal. But the ID of this
sending unit, i.e., the transceiver in its transmitter mode, is
the ID of the receiver, i.e. the transceiver in its receiver
mode, since it is simply the ID of the transceiver regardless of
the mode of the transceiver. Accordingly, contrary to
appellant's position, the cited art does suggest producing a
reply signal that includes the serial number of the receiving
transponder.
When we come to appellant's third argument, regarding
the claimed "switch," we agree with appellant that the applied
references would not have suggested the claimed "switch being
selectable to a plurality of positions, each switch position
representing a predetermined ID number that identifies the remote
controllable system."
The examiner identifies the keyboard 50 in Rubin as
corresponding to the claimed switch and, in response to
appellant's argument that keyboard 50 is not used to change its
ID number, the examiner contends [supplemental answer, page 3]
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007