Appeal No. 1997-0884
Application 08/260,148
and arguably does so dependent on a flag which is set when a
transmitter has been used at least once, but does not do so
after being configured as a transmitter.
For the reasons stated above, the Examiner has failed to
establish a prima facie case of anticipation. The rejection
of claims 1 and 2 over Lindmayer is reversed.
35 U.S.C. § 103
The Examiner's reliance on the APA fails to address
Appellants' arguments. The APA states that "Texas Instruments
Incorporated manufactures an integrated circuit having both
transmission and reception capability" (specification, page 1,
lines 14-15). Appellants argue (Br6):
This does not disclose that the receiver receives
and stores access codes and the transmitter transmits
access codes.
The background of the invention additionally
discloses a transmitter and receiver having different
integrated circuits, and it is respectfully submitted
that the different transmitters on some integrated
circuits transmits codes while separate receivers on
other integrated circuits receive and store access codes.
Because applicants are under a duty to disclose information
material to patentability, we interpret this argument as
denying that it was known to Appellants to have a
- 8 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007