Ex parte TAPPERSON et al. - Page 3




          Appeal No. 1999-1456                                                        
          Application No. 08/864,750                                                  


               Independent claim 2 is reproduced as follows:                          
               2.  A distributed control system for controlling material              
          flow within an industrial process, comprising:                              
               a plurality of industrial process control field devices                
          for            sensing or altering material flow within the                 
          industrial          process;                                                
               central control means connected via a primary hardwired                
                    communication link to the industrial process control              
                    field devices to communicate first signals between                
          the            central control means and the industrial process             
                         control field devices;                                       
               a first transceiver;                                                   
               a second transceiver connected to at least one of the                  
                         industrial process control field devices, the                
          first                                                                       
                    and second transceivers providing redundant two-way               
                    wireless communications of second signals between                 
          the            first transceiver and the second transceiver.                
               The Examiner relies on the following reference:                        
          Clark et al. (Clark)          5,666,530           Sep. 9, 1997              
               Claims 2 through 12 and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.              
          § 103 as being unpatentable over Appellants admitted prior art              
          in view of Clark.                                                           
               Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the              
          Examiner, reference is made to the brief and answer for the                 
          respective details thereof.                                                 


                                          3                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007