Appeal No. 1997-0622
Application No. 08/414,051
the mobile station in Grauel initiates information exchange
(column 4, lines 5 through 36; column 5, lines 6 through 26;
and column 6, lines 47 through 61). Even if we assume for the
sake of argument that the word 1 and the word 2 disclosed by
Dahlin (column 4, lines 19 through 51) are two different
communications formats as stated by the examiner (answer, page
12), we agree with the appellants’ argument (brief, page 19)
that “[i]t is difficult to see how the Examiner translates
this as the base station commanding the mobile station to
communicate in a particular one of a plurality of
communication formats, or, of more relevance, how it renders
obvious such features of claims 32 and 34 as the method and
means of sending on a digital multiple-access channel from the
base station to the mobile station information indicating that
the base station is to be communicated with according to a
particular one of a plurality of communication formats,
different ones of the plurality of communication formats
involving different lengths of bursts from the mobile station
to the base station, and sending bursts from the mobile
station to the base station according to the particular one of
a plurality of communication formats.” In summary, the 35
16
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007