Appeal No. 95-5053
Application 08/048,188
instead of the 45 MHz band for the performance advantages of,
for example, shorter antenna wavelength (EA5). Appellant does
not contest this conclusion and we agree that this
modification would have been suggested to one of ordinary
skill in the art by Rose.
The limitations at issue are: (1) "receiving a third
modulated signal in which a third carrier is modulated with a
second information signal of an incoming call, wherein a
frequency of the third carrier is in a third frequency band
corresponding to a combined cellular/cordless frequency band
that is different from both the first frequency band of the
first carrier and the second frequency band of the second
carrier"; and (2) "a single demodulating circuit for
demodulating the third modulated signal received in the
antenna means to reproduce the second information signal of
the incoming call."
The examiner's position is (EA6):
Therefore, given the close [frequency] transmission
ranges between which the cordless telephone and cellular
telephone base stations transmit, it would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time
of invention, to have provided a common passband
filter/receiving means, thus receiving both frequency
ranges transmitted by either type of base station. The
motivation for implementing a common passband
- 7 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007