Appeal No. 1997-1632 Page 11
Application No. 08/138,555
(Independent claim 80, in contrast, does not require such modulation and will be treated
separately.)
For its part, Tolson teaches that “[w]hile wire paths are shown in FIGURES 2
through 6, it will be apparent to those skilled in the art that energy paths E may equally
well be of any other suitable nature, such as . . . a radio signal. . . .” Col. 4, ll. 53-56.
Contrary to the examiner’s assertion that the reference discloses a modulated RF link,
however, Tolson is silent about the use of modulation in its radio signal. Because
Tolson does not use coded data to open and close its windows, but merely sends a
signal via the energy paths, moreover, a person of ordinary skill in the art would
interpret Tolson as not requiring modulation. Therefore, we reverse the rejection of
claims 45, 68, and 73, and of claims 46, 48, 50-53, and 55-60, which depend from
claim 45, as unpatentable over claims 1 and 2 of Larson in view of Tolson.
For its part, claim 80 specifies in pertinent part the following limitations: “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.” Giving the claim its broadest reasonable
construction, the limitations merely require remotely programming a key by transferring
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007