Appeal No. 1997-1011 Application No. 08/250,631 (picture tube 15). Takarada, however, includes a single type of character data (which appears to be for close captioning) and does not describe source information as the character data. Claim 1, on the other hand, requires two types of icons, close captioning and source data. Niioka discloses providing a broadcast wave receiving system with a display of channel receiving information, such as the call signs of the stations, to inform the user of the name or call sign of a channel as it is received. Niioka, however, does not transmit the call signs with the broadcast. Rather, Niioka presets and stores the information at the receiver and compares the frequency of the received broadcast with frequency data stored with the call signs. We find no motivation in either reference for transmitting the network identifiers with the broadcast signals, as the disclosure of Niioka is limited to presetting such information at the receiver. Additionally, neither reference discloses transmitting both close captioning and source data as the character data, as Takarada transmits only one type of character data and Niioka does not transmit any type of icon or character data. Accordingly, the examiner has failed to establish a prima facie case of obviousness. Therefore, we cannot sustain the rejection of claims 1 through 10, 14, 15, and 19 through 21. 5Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007