Appeal No. 1997-1378
Application No. 08/065,328
the proposed combination of Natarajan and Imaseki to establish
a prima facie case of obviousness. After considering the
arguments of record, we initially agree with Appellants that,
since Natarajan has an existing signal quality determination
feature in place, the need for such a feature as taught by
Imaseki is obviated.
On further review and analysis of the language of
representative claim 1, however, we find Imaseki’s selective
channel communication teachings to be cumulative to that of
Natarajan. Further, it is our view that the Figure 5
illustration and accompanying description in Natarajan
discloses all of the recited method steps of representative
claim 1. We note that the relevant portion of claim 1, to
which Appellants’
arguments are particularly directed, recites:2
determining if the communications quality value
becomes unacceptable, and if so, changing the
operating mode of the mobile station to a search
operating mode wherein beacon messages received
from any of the base stations are monitored; ...
2Similar recitations appear in claims 9 and 19, the other
independent claims on appeal.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007