Appeal No. 2000-0519
Application 08/800,627
one (RBr2) and treat the rejection as being over Hershey,
Griffiths, and Hulyalkar.
Claims 1, 4-9, and 11-15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hershey when taken in
view of Griffiths and Hulyalkar.
OPINION
Hershey acknowledges that Griffiths explored the issue
of using television broadcast signals as a fortuitous
illuminators of opportunity for a bistatic radar system
(p. 45, referring to reference [4]). Griffiths discloses
that signal processing in a television-based bistatic radar
may be assisted by modifying the television signal to
introduce a pulsed signal which can achieve something more
akin to a normal radar waveform (p. 654, first full para.),
which teaching is recognized by Appellants (specification,
p. 1, lines 31-33). Griffiths discloses Doppler and range
signal processing (pp. 655-657).
Hershey describes an experiment by the Institute of
Telecommunication Sciences (ITS) wherein "the ITS
experimenters first insinuated a 127 bit pseudonoise (PN)
sequence, and its copy, for a total of 254 bits, into a
- 5 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007