Appeal No. 97-0391
Application 08/443,044
BAT as shown on the figure 1 to indicate the battery status, .
. .”[page 3]. Thus, we conclude that the remote control of
Malik will sense “an adverse . . . environmental condition
adverse to operation of said control unit” (claim 1, lines 4
and 5) when it senses that the battery is low and its function
will be impaired if a new battery is not substituted. Malik
also shows a warning means in the form of the display 12
[figure 1 and page 3]. Therefore, we sustain the anticipation
rejection of claim 1 over Malik. Appellants have not
individually argued any claims under this heading. It is not
the function of the Board to examine claims in greater detail
than argued by Appellant. Baxter Travenol Labs. 952 F.2d at
391, 21 USPQ2d at 1285. Consequently, we also sustain the
anticipation rejection of claims 2, 4, 7 and 10 over Malik.
Rejection of Claims 3 and 5 over Malik and Durst
The Examiner states:
In view of Durst et al. (‘404), . . . it would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art [at the time of
the invention,] to provide a [sic] orientation-responsive
remote control means in the remote control . . . shown by
WO9014563 in order to notify the user when the control unit is
in a given operating position. [Final rejection, page 2].
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007