Appeal No. 1999-1447
Application No. 08/446,316
U.S. PATENT NO. 4,583,131 APPLICATION CLAIMS
Claim 1 - IJLMNOSZ Claim 45 - IJNUVWYZ
Claim 6 - IJLMNOPQRSZ Claim 49 - IJNUVWYZ
Claim 7 - IJLMNOSZ
Claim 12- IJLMNOPQRSZ
From the comparison, it is clearly seen that each of the
independent application claims 45 and 49 includes inter alia a
first signal indicative of audio being present, and a second
signal (i.e., a squelch signal) that is distinct from the
first signal, and that is active for a time period at least on
the order of one-tenth second. When the squelch signal is
active, the application claims prevent the output of audio
information. The examiner has not explained how the
application claims with this feature could have been presented
at the time of prosecution of the patent claims, or how this
claimed subject matter is "covered" by the patent claims no
matter what other feature is incorporated in them. It would
have been equally helpful for an explanation by the examiner
as to why no other evidence of obviousness was needed beyond
the claims of the patent. In the absence of such a showing or
a convincing line of reasoning by the examiner, we agree with
the appellant that the added feature(s) in these application
17
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007