Appeal No. 2000-0612
Application No. 08/583,357
(Answer, page 6) that it would have been obvious to use different
channels for radio ports and long range pagers to "minimize/
eliminate interference between the Micro-cells and Marco-cells
[sic] where there is overlap between the two (Micro and Macro
cells) base station transceivers." Thus, the examiner uses the
same motivation, to eliminate interference, for using different
channels as for using the same channel. We agree with appellants
that these two statements are contradictory, cannot be used
together to reject the claims. Therefore, we cannot sustain the
rejection of claims 1 and 13.
In addition, Lucas discloses that interference is avoided
between a local system and a wide area system that overlap with
each other. On the other hand, claim 1 requires that the long
range pagers define a "paging service area outside of the voice
service area." Therefore, to use the teachings of Lucas, the
examiner must apply the disclosure of overlapping systems. Since
this contradicts the claim limitation of separate service areas,
the combination of Driessen and Okada with Lucas fails to meet
the limitation of a paging service area outside of the voice
service area. Accordingly, we further cannot sustain the
rejection of claim 1.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007