Appeal No. 96-2546
Application No. 08/001,825
stated position in the Brief with regard to the present
claimed comparing and direction indicating limitations. We
can find no teaching in Lee, either attributed to the
diversity combiner or any other circuit, that would perform a
comparison operation to produce a surface wave direction
indication output.
We note that, in the responsive arguments portion at page
7 of the Answer, the Examiner offers a much broader
interpretation of the term “comparator” than what is asserted
by Appellant. Initially, the Examiner suggests that simply
because Lee’s diversity combiner has inputs for two composite
signals, a comparison operation of the two signals takes
place. Further, the Examiner attributes a comparator function
to Lee’s summer 24 which subtracts two signals to provide a
resultant H signal. It is our view, however, that, to the
extent the Examiner’s general observation as to comparing
operations is correct, the Lee reference remains deficient in
providing any wave direction indication as a result of any
such comparison. The Examiner’s conclusion (Answer, page 7)
that a direction indicator output is necessary since Lee’s
antenna arrangement would need to be rotated to provide an
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007