Appeal No. 2002-0312 Page 12
Application No. 08/953,922
As was the case with the other two rejections, at least some of the same
shortcomings of this rejection are applicable to claims 2-4 and 7-20, and we will not
sustain this rejection of those claims.
Unquestionably, it is well known to use wireless remote controls to operate a
multitude of devices, from garage doors to satellites. However, this does not, in and of
itself, provide a basis from which to conclude that it therefore would have been obvious
to operate any device by means of a wireless remote control, including a snow plow
having the characteristics recited in the appellants’ claims. To arrive at the conclusion
that the invention claimed by the appellants would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art requires the presentation by the examiner of evidence establishing a
prima facie case of obviousness with regard to each and every limitation recited in each
of the claims which, quite importantly in the present case, must include the requisite
suggestion to combine the references in the manner proposed by the examiner. This, in
our view, has not been accomplished in the three rejections before us.
SUMMARY
None of the rejections are sustained.
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
REVERSED
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007