Appeal No. 1996-4065
Application No. 08/234,115
lines 13-15 [of claim 5] as controlling different
operations in at least two apparatus. (Reply brief-
page 2.)
The Examiner responds:
Regarding Appellant’s limitation that
operations for different equipments are controlled,
the Examiner notes that Lee specifically suggests
that different equipments and commands for each
equipment can be transmitted, see Figure 3B and
Figure 5, items 204-206 as well as column 3, lines
44-51 and column 6, lines 17-30 of US 5,212,487.
Note that Lee discloses storing product codes for
different products and outputting them sequentially
so “that a variety of electric appliances can be
simultaneously controlled.” (Answer-page 9.)
We fail to find any support in the Examiner’s
citations for the controlling of different operations in at
least two apparatus as claimed. Lee controls the same
operation for different products simultaneously.
Appellant argues:
Additionally, neither of the applied references
teaches or suggests the feature of determining if
the actuated key is a plural function key as
required by Claim 5. (Brief-page 5.)
The Examiner responds:
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007