Appeal No. 2000-2261
Application 08/730,670
feeds both modulators 6 and 10, it would have been obvious to do
so according to the common teachings of both references, even
though, as indicated earlier in this opinion with respect to the
rejection of the claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102, the DSP processor
10 in the prior art Figure 1 of Denheyer does not specifically
teach feeding the I and Q signals to the analog processor 22.
Nevertheless, the rejection of independent claim 1 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 must be reversed because the combination of
Nonami and Denheyer does not provide the features of the wherein
clause stating "said In-phase modulating signal I and said
Quadrature modulating signal Q bypass said quadrature modulation
means in order to produce said analog modulated signal" set forth
at the end of independent claim 1 on appeal. This feature is
derived from specification page 8, lines 9-12 as to the showing
in Figure 1 of appellant's disclosed invention and the
corresponding explicit teaching at page 11, lines 3-5 relative to
the Figure 2 embodiment. Because the Figures 1 and 2 embodiments
of Nonami specifically teach the DSP signal processor 4 feeding
the respective modulators 6 and 10 in parallel, there is no
teaching of any bypass operation in Nonami. (Column 4, lines
65-68). Correspondingly, Figures 2-3 of Denheyer also do not
indicate this bypass feature.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007