Appeal No. 97-0391
Application 08/443,044
also sustained.
Rejection of Claims 1, 2, 4, 7 and 10 over Malik
These claims are rejected as being anticipated by Malik
under 35 U.S.C. § 102. We have studied Appellants’ arguments
[brief, pages 10 to 13] and the Examiner’s position [answer,
pages 7 and 8]. We agree with Appellants that the remote
control of Malik transmits a control signal to the controlled
unit when the environmental temperature exceeds a desired
temperature setting in the remote control, and the remote
control does not sense any failure of the remote control as
regards the temperature condition of the environment. The
Examiner’s contention that the remote control of Malik will
fail in response to some very high temperature of the
environment is mere speculation. However, by Appellants’ own
admission, the term “adverse” or “hostile” defines an
environmental condition as a condition that impairs the
operation or structural integrity of the remote control.”
[Brief, page 6]. With this definition in, Malik properly
anticipates the invention of claim 1. For example, Malik “has
a display 12 which . . . may also have other display, such as
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007