Appeal No. 95-1865
Application 07/970,816
The examiner relies on the following references:
Bovee et al. (Bovee) 4,214,128 July 22, 1980
Balaban et al. (Balaban) 4,514,760 Apr. 30, 1985
Hayashi et al. (Hayashi) 5,062,124 Oct. 29, 1991
Additionally, the examiner relies on prior art depicted in Figures 1-4 of the instant application.
Claims 1 through 16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103. As evidence of obviousness,
the examiner cites the prior art of Figures 1-4 in view of Hayashi with regard to claims 1 through
8, 10 through 13, 15 and 16, adding Balaban or Bovee with regard to claims 9 and 14.
Reference is made to the briefs and answer for the respective positions of appellant and
the examiner.
OPINION
We reverse.
Independent claim 1 requires, inter alia, “phase delay means for applying a receive clock to
said second transceiver of said second channel medium delayed from said receive clock of said
second transceiver of said first channel medium.” Independent claim 3 requires, inter alia, that
“said receive clock of said first transceiver is phase offset from said receive clock of said second
transceiver… detecting a phase error… and means for adjusting the phase of said transmit clock
signal applied to said transmitter of said second transceiver in response to said phase error
detected… ” Independent claim 11 requires, inter alia, “producing a fourth receive clock signal
phase displaced from said third receive clock signal… detector means… for detecting a phase
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007