Appeal No. 1999-1109
Application No. 08/359,904
‘rate or change’ of signal strength is not used by the speed
estimator. Instead, the speed estimator in Chia uses an
averaged signal.”
We disagree with Appellant’s position. On pages 8 and 9 of
Chia, it is described that the changing of the template is
proportional to the velocity of the mobile unit. Therefore, the
velocity is being used as determinative of the template
selection which is related to the signal strength. As we
discussed before, to the extent claimed, the velocity recited in
the claim is not limited to the absolute velocity, contrary to
the position argued by Appellant.
Therefore, we sustain the obviousness rejection of claims
1, 2, 8 and 9 over Chia in view of Schellinger.
Chia, Schellinger and Shiotsuki
The Examiner rejects claims 3-5 and 14 over this
combination. According to the Examiner, answer at page 9, Chia
in view of Schellinger et al. discloses all the subject matter
claimed except for the velocity of movement being determined by
sensing the rate at which the radio telephone moves across cell
boundaries. The Examiner contends, id. at 10, that “it would
have been obvious ... to incorporate the velocity of movement is
18
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007