Appeal No. 1999-1605
Application 08/502,882
Tanaka only deals with one application and there are no
predetermined associations of remote control devices and
applications as claimed (Br6-7). Further, it is argued that
the OCR device is not a remote control device as taught in the
present application nor as claimed (Br7).
The Examiner finds that it is inherent that Tanaka has a
module for identifying an application associated with the
remote control device "since Tanaka et al could identify each
of the multiple remote control devices . . . and each of the
multiple remote control devices (2,3) has to cooperate with
its own application program (own driver)" (FR2) and "[e]ach of
the multiple remote control device[s] (2,3) has its own
interface and driver (application program) in a processor
system" (FR5). Therefore, the Examiner finds that keyboard
and OCR transmitters each have an associated device driver
(although this is not disclosed in Tanaka) and reads the
claimed "applications" on those device drivers rather than on
the word processing program; see also EA6-7. The Examiner
concludes that "[i]t would have been obvious to have a router
for routing a representation of the desired user interaction
to the identified application for execution since Tanaka et al
- 5 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007