Appeal No. 1999-1697
Application No. 08/550,270 Page 6
We consider first the rejection of claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 9-11,
13, 14, 17, 18, 21-23, and 25 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based on
the teachings of Hartley in view of Blackwell. We begin with
claims 1 and 2. The examiner's position (answer, pages 4 and 5)
is that Hartley does not disclose that the carrier board is
within a casing with the connector accessible through an aperture
at one end. The examiner takes Official notice that this feature
is old and well known. The examiner further asserts that Hartley
does not disclose a plurality of transceivers. To overcome this
deficiency of Hartley, the examiner turns to Blackwell (see
figures 4 and 5) for a teaching of two transceivers in a single
data communications system.
Appellants assert (brief, pages 7-9) that Hartley and
Blackwell do not disclose a single programmable digital signal
processor (DSP), a plurality of transceiving means, and that all
of the transceiving means can be activated by the single
programmable DSP. Appellants further assert (brief, pages 5 and
6) that the examiner's characterization of element 3 of Hartley
as a carrier board is in error because element 3 of Hartley is a
modem. It is argued (brief, pages 9-11) that there is no basis
in either of the references for their combination.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007