Appeal No. 1997-1632 Page 3
Application No. 08/138,555
A further understanding of the invention can be achieved by reading the following
claim:
80. In an electronic key for use with an electronic lock, the key and
lock being distinct from one another and movable relative thereto, the key
including a microprocessor, a battery coupled to the microprocessor, a
memory coupled to the microprocessor, a keypad including at least the
digits 0-9, the keypad being coupled to the microprocessor, and a
communications port for sending signals to the lock, an improvement
comprising:
a receiver for receiving electromagnetic radio frequency signals;
and
a decoder coupled to the receiver for providing data corresponding
to a received radio frequency signal to the memory to change data stored
therein;
wherein characteristics of the key can be programmed remotely.
Claims 45, 46, 48, 50-53, 55-60, 68-70, and 73-80 stand rejected under the
judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting as unpatentable over
claims 1 and 2 of U.S. Patent No. 5,245,652 (“Larson”) alone and over Larson in view
of U.S. Patent No. 3,337,992 (“Tolson”). Claim 54 stands rejected under the doctrine
as unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 5,602,536 (“Henderson”).
Claims 45, 46, 48, 50, 51, 55-57, 59, and 60 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as obvious over U.S. Patent No. 4,415,893 (“Roland”) in view of Tolson.
Claim 47 stands rejected under § 103 as obvious over Roland or U.S. Patent No.
4,760,393 (“Mauch '393") in view of Tolson further in view of U.S. Patent No. 4,236,068
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007