Appeal No. 1999-2694
Application No. 08/684,651
other of said transmitters, whereby said other of the transmitters then
transmits said first and second channels.
The examiner relies on the following references:
Langseth et al. (Langseth) 4,287,598 Sep. 01, 1981
Lux 5,274,836 Dec. 28, 1993
Claims 1-7 and 10-14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable
over Lux in view of Langseth.
Reference is made to the brief and answer for the respective positions of
appellants and the examiner.
OPINION
At pages 5-6 of the answer, the examiner identifies the elements of Lux which
allegedly correspond to the instant claimed elements, admitting that Lux fails to disclose
the claimed means for sensing loss of output signals from the one of the transmitters, for
providing both input signals to the input of the other of the transmitters, whereby the other of
the transmitters then transmits the first and second channels. However, the examiner
indicates that Langseth teaches, in Figures 4 and 9, a cooperating arrangement for a pair
of space diversity stations wherein each station normally communicates independently with
a remote point. At the occurrence of a fade condition at one of the two stations, the fading
station alerts the other station of the pair of the condition and both stations are enabled to
cause the normal two-way
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007