Appeal No. 96-1551
Application No. 08/081,426
Reference is made to the brief and the answer for the
respective positions of the appellant and the examiner.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the entire record before us,
and we will reverse the obviousness rejection of claims 4 and 5.
The only contested limitation in the claims on appeal is
“said base unit being for digital radio communication with a
fixed transmitting station and for analog radio communication
with said handset.”
Appellant and the examiner both agree that in Ito
communication between the base station (BSS) and the mobile base
device (MSS) is effected digitally, and that communication
between the mobile base device (MSS) and the portable device
(PSS) is likewise “effected digitally” (Brief, page 4, and
Answer, page 3).
The examiner states (Answer, page 3), that Mizikovsky,
Figs. 1-2, teaches the dual mode cellular telephone wherein the
portable unit (1) is in an analog radio communication with the
base unit (5) and the base unit (5) is in a digital radio
communication with a fixed station.” According to the examiner
(Answer, pages 3 and 4):
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007