Appeal No. 1999-1605
Application 08/502,882
obvious to use other transmitters, such as a mouse pointer
device, to interact with the word processor program of Tanaka,
the Examiner has not provided such reasoning and we do not
rely on it. The transmitted device code in Fig. 2, which
indicates the type of transmitter, is broadly "a signal
identifying itself," where this limitation is not as narrow as
"an indication unique to said remote control device," as
recited in claim 1. The transmitted data part in Fig. 2 is
broadly "a signal representing a desired user interaction with
an application." A receiver 1 receives signals from the
remote control devices.
The Examiner found that the data processing is done
according to a device driver specific to the type of
transmitter; i.e., the receiver must have a driver that
handles keyboard data from a keyboard transmitter, a different
driver that handles OCR data from an OCR transmitter, and some
way of routing data to the proper driver associated with the
type of transmitter. Thus, the Examiner found that the
"applications" are the device driver programs, not the word
processing program. Appellants have not challenged the
inherent existence of device drivers in Tanaka, nor said why a
- 7 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007