Appeal No. 2006-1148
Application No. 10/382,492
of these references improper.
We disagree with appellants.
Any teaching by Schwarzbach regarding monitoring whether a lamp is turned on or
off is irrelevant here. When Schwarzbach’s system is applied to airfield lighting, where there
is no on/off switch on each individual lamp, such monitoring will be unnecessary. The lamps
on the airfield will all be on or all will be off, and the only concern is to monitor whether the
lighting means (i.e., a bulb) has failed. Appellants’ argument regarding Schwarzbach’s
monitoring lamps for determining whether they are on or off is, in our view, a red herring. It
has no relevance in the environment of airfield lighting and Tann suggests the use of
Schwarzbach’s system in an airfield lighting environment. Moreover, to the extent that
Schwarzbach is concerned with such monitoring, we need not be concerned with every single
item in the disclosure of a reference unless it has some bearing on, or relevance to, making
the proposed combination or teaching away from making the proposed combination. In the
instant case, we find the on/off switch of Schwarzbach’s lamps to be irrelevant to
Schwarzbach’s general teaching of a remote lighting control and monitoring system, and
especially irrelevant when such a system is applied in environments where there are no
on/off switches on lamps to be monitored, such as airfield lighting, as taught by Tann.
Knapp provides the teaching of monitoring lamps for burned out bulbs and the skilled
artisan would have found this very relevant to all lighting systems. Thus in a remote control
and monitoring lighting system for an airfield, suggested by the Schwarzbach/Tann
combination, where individual lamps have no on/off switch, the artisan would have found it
-8-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007