Appeal No. 2003-2065
Application 09/881,441
F.3d 1338, 1344, 61 USPQ2d 1430, 1434 (Fed. Cir. 2002). With
these principles in mind, we commence review of the pertinent
evidence and arguments of Appellants and Examiner.
As pointed out above, we found that Lewis teaches providing
a test voice information signal to a packet data network.
However, we fail to find that Lewis teaches receiving packets for
the voice call and adding at least part of the stored test voice
information to at least some of the packets as recited in
Appellants’ claim 1. Furthermore, we note that the remaining
claims also recite similar limitations. Furthermore, we fail to
find that Tschudin or Petitcolas teaches this limitation as well.
Therefore, we will not sustain the Examiner’s rejection of claims
1 through 10, 12 and 14 through 23.
Conclusion
We affirm the Examiner’s rejection of claim 11 under
35 U.S.C. § 102 and we affirm the rejection of claim 13 under
35 U.S.C. § 103. However, we reverse the Examiner’s rejection of
claims 1 through 10, 12 and 14 through 23.
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007