Appeal No. 96-3618
Application 08/004,598
Claim 66 recites a battery operated portable structure
having two transceivers. Neither Gillig nor Schellinger
discloses a battery operated structure and we do not find
where the Examiner addresses this limitation. Claim 66
further recites that the structure effectuates communication
between a cellular base station and the structure, and between
the structure and a portable cordless telephone instrument.
Assuming, arguendo, that the combination of Gillig and
Schellinger is proper, the microcellular system would
communicate with the TELCO over hardwired telephone lines, not
a cellular base station as claimed. For these two reasons,
the rejection of claim 66 is reversed.
Claims 67 is are similar to claim 66 and the rejection of
claim 67 and its dependent claims 71 and 72 is reversed for
the same two reasons.
Claims 73 and 77 recite connect means to effectuate
communication between a cordless telephone instrument, the
cordless base station, a cellular telephone instrument, and a
cellular base station, which is similar to the cellular
cordless scheme in claim 66. Assuming, arguendo, that the
combination of Gillig and Schellinger is proper, it does not
- 43 -
Page: Previous 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007