Appeall No. 1998-1398 Page 24
Application No. 08/400,637
First, the appellants argue, “[n]owhere in the preferred
embodiment of the priority document does the priority document
teach or suggest using one transceiver to origninate [sic] and
receive calls in both the cordless and cellular telephone
systems." (Appeal Br. at 14.) Claims 27-29 specify in
pertinent part the following limitations: "a transceiver, ...
originating
and receiving cellular calls, using the transceiver ...;
originating and receiving cordless calls, using the
transceiver ...." Giving the claims their broadest reasonable
interpretation, the limitations can include using several
transmitters and receivers to originate and receive calls in
cordless and cellular telephone systems.
The Gillig references would have suggested the
limitations. Specifically, Figure 2 of each of the references
shows a cordless receiver 112, a cordless transmitter 114, a
cellular receiver 122, and a cellular transmitter 124.
Similarly, Figure 3 of each of the Gillig references depicts a
cordless receiver 214, a cordless transmitter 212, a cellular
receiver 224, and a cellular transmitter 222.
Page: Previous 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007