Appeal No. 2000-1944
Application 08/738,157
Analysis
Appellants argue that there is no teaching or suggestion in
Froehling as to transmission of a message that will initiate a
visible display if the message is successfully processed by the
HVAC device (Br7). It is argued that none of the examples of
information gathered by the controller 10 (col. 24, line 54 to
col. 25, line 11) appears to have come from or to be prompted by
a communication from the head end unit 14 (Br7). Appellants
argue that the statement in Froehling that the data processing
units 16 are for "checking and verifying information passed
between the controllers 10 and the headend unit 14" (col. 10,
lines 50-52) "does not infer any particular checking and
verifying of a message that would lead to initiating a visible
display in the controllers 10" (Br8).
The Examiner admits that "Froehling does not specifically
disclose the claimed network control device sending a message
including information for prompting the HVAC device to initiate a
visible display on the HVAC device if the message is successfully
processed by the HVAC device" (FR3).
Thus, the Examiner does not dispute that Froehling discloses
only a network control device connected to an HVAC device over a
communication network and does not disclose or suggest any of the
three steps of claim 1 or the structure in the body of claim 21.
- 6 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007