Appeal No. 1999-0470
Application 08/639,136
With respect to independent claim 14, appellants argue
that the recitation of simulating characteristics of signals,
analyzing the simulated characteristics and entering soft
handoff based on the analysis is not the same as merely
claiming soft handoff as asserted by the examiner [brief, page
9]. The examiner responds that the skilled artisan would have
recognized the conventionality of soft handoff as compared
with hard handoff and would experience no difficulty in
selecting the one appropriate for the condition [answer, page
10].
Neither of the statements of appellants and the
examiner properly addresses the obviousness of the claimed
invention. The proper question should be whether it would
have been obvious in the simulation disclosed by Markus to
simulate the effects of soft handoffs and to have a base
station enter a soft handoff with a simulated mobile station
in response to the results of the simulation. Since Markus
never mentions a soft handoff, we do not see how one can find
that Markus would have suggested the simulation of soft
handoffs in order to adjust the control of base stations in
handling such soft handoffs. Any other finding would be sheer
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007