Appeal No. 97-2892
Application No. 08/274,556
Claims 1 through 3 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Gilhousen in view of Dixon.
Reference is made to the briefs and the answer for the
respective positions of the appellants and the examiner.
OPINION
The obviousness rejection of claims 1 through 3 is
reversed.
Gilhousen specifically states that he uses exactly four
PN chips for every Walsh chip (column 27, lines 56 through 58;
column 35, lines 1 through 3).
Appellants and the examiner agree that Gilhousen does not
disclose 8 to 64 PN chips, and setting the PN chipping rate at
a level high enough so that the correlators in the
demodulators provide processing gain discrimination against
multipath signal components delayed more than a small fraction
of a RW chip duration (Brief, pages 6 and 7; Answer, page 5).
In formulating the obviousness rejection, the examiner
quotes the following excerpt from Dixon:
appellants, we will assume that this publication was published
somewhere before the application filing date of July 14, 1994.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007