Appeal No. 2006-0944
Application No. 09/895,584
wireless interface to enumerate a plurality of devices and remotely select one of the devices for
communication.
Clearly, Erekson discloses the control of a remote device over a wireless interface (see
the first line of the Abstract) where a plurality of remote devices are enumerated on and one of
the remote devices is selected by a hand held device (Abstract, column 5, lines 38-45, column 6,
lines 5-19). In fact, the only difference between what is disclosed by Erekson and recited in
broad claim 21 is that whereas Erekson uses a hand held device having a screen and icons for the
apparatus which communicates with and chooses a remote device, claim 21 employs a “mouse
apparatus.
However, in view of Kolde’s disclosure that a mouse, either wired or wireless, may be
used for communicating with remote devices (Paragraph [0030] discloses that one type of remote
control which may be used is a “wireless mouse”), it is clear to us that the artisan would have
been led to the use of such a wireless mouse as one type of equally obvious remote control device
for use in Erekson in selecting and controlling one of several remote devices.
Appellants argue that such a combination would require a substantial redesign in
Erekson, disposing of the hand held screen with the icons in place of a mouse. We disagree. 35
U.S.C. §103 does not require the outright substitution of one element for another, i.e., bodily
incorporation, when combining references, but rather that the combination of references would
have fairly suggested to one skilled in the art the claimed subject matter. Clearly, Erekson
-8-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007