Appeal No. 1997-1232
Application No. 08/182,035
we agree with Appellant’s argument (Reply Brief, page 4) that
the language of independent claim 2 which requires the
determination of a timing point from a part of the signal
having a detected suitability is not met by the disclosure of
Carmon. Our review of Carmon indicates that no actual timing
point is derived but, rather, only whether the present timing
point is to be advanced or retarded.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007