Appeal No. 2000-0377
Application 08/777,841
easily identify hardware configuration/setting located at a
remote location(s)" (emphasis omitted) (EA4).
Appellant argues that subparagraphs 6(b)(ii)(A) and (B) are
mechanical switches requiring mechanical movement by a human or
robot for operation, whereas both references refer to remote
control of the subject matter viewed (Br18). Thus, it is argued,
the references, by teaching remote control, teach against adding
those switches to their displays because the switches cannot be
controlled remotely (Br18). It is argued that the Examiner's
rationale for combining is flawed (Br18-19).
Hotka teaches providing a visual image indicative of the
physical appearance of electronic circuitry located at a remote
location including visual signals including the colors of
illuminated light sources. Hotka does not teach (1) means for
obtaining, from a remote location, data enabling the workstation
to produce a visual image indicative of the physical appearance
of the electronic circuits, or (2) visual signals indicating the
positions of mechanical toggle switches or rotary switches. As
to difference (1), the Examiner concluded that it would have been
obvious to transmit appearance data from a remote location in
Hotka in view of the teachings in Yamada. Appellant does not
contest this conclusion. Nevertheless, we note that Yamada
discloses means for obtaining data which permits a workstation to
- 11 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007