Appeal No. 1999-1551
Application No. 08/547,736
disclosed by Barnes, with the combined teachings of Connolly and Krebs, appellants
[principal brief-page 14] merely set forth the limitations of claim 5 and state that it “is not
seen where this particular subject matter is disclosed or suggested by Barnes, in
conjunction with the hybrid trunked/PCS system in accordance with the proposed
combination of Connolly...and Krebs...” This argument is unpersuasive of patentability in
view of the examiner’s identification of the passage in Barnes which allegedly teaches the
claimed limitation. In other words, appellants have not fully confronted and answered the
examiner’s rationale in setting forth the rejection of claim 5.
Later, in the reply brief, appellants stress that Barnes is not combinable with
Connolly and Krebs and actually teaches away from the use of cellular telephone networks
as a communications system in a wide area network. As evidence, appellants point to
column 3, lines 48-52, of Barnes indicating that primary difficulties that are overcome in a
wide area network comprised of cellular networks relate to the handoff of communications
when a mobile transceiver moves from cell to cell during transmission [reply brief-page 5].
Appellants go on to note various advantages/disadvantages of establishing wide area
networks for transmission trunked communications systems [reply brief-page 6] and
conclude that the teachings of Barnes “could be extended only to the trunked portion of the
combined references” [reply brief-page 6].
14
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007