An innovative patent must provide a substantial contribution to the working of the invention.  The case concerned the display of information on fixed and handheld devices.  The provision of a handheld remote control was not seen as a substantial contribution to the working of the invention.  Absent any remote display, the provision of information on a remote display would have provided a substantial contribution.
Invalidating an innovation patent for want of innovative step can be a difficult process.  Features that provide any type of advantage in the context of the invention may be seen to provide a substantial improvement to the working of the thing (and not to be seen as superficial or peripheral to the invention). For this reason, it is generally necessary to find a clear knockout in a single document or an act.  A single source of information test applies that excludes general incorporations by reference.