Appeal No. 1998-2933
Application 08/439,082
transmission of said remote control signal from said portable
transmitter by identifying the idling information," the
Examiner has failed to establish a prima facie case of
obviousness. The rejection of claims 1, 2, 4, and 5 is
reversed.
Claims 6 and 8-10
Claim 6 does not recite that the idling information
comprises a plurality of digital bits.
Claim 6 recites that "said control unit detects a
transmission of said remote control signal from the remote
control unit by identifying the supplied idling information"
(emphasis added) which is similar to the limitation discussed
in connection with claim 1 which is missing from the
combination of the APA and Suman.
In addition, claim 6 recites that "said control unit and
said signal receiver are placed in a continuously activated
condition when said control unit detects the idling
information of the received remote control signal," which
requires taking specific action upon detection of the idling
information. Suman does not disclose what action is taken
upon detection of the start bit and, therefore, does not
- 12 -
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007