Appeal No. 1999-2694
Application No. 08/684,651
communications between the faded station and the distant point to be routed over the
communication link for two-way transmission between the non-faded station of the pair and
the distant point along with the normal associated two-way transmissions between the non-
faded station and the distant point.
The examiner concludes that it would have been obvious to combine Lux with
Langseth in order to provide a continuous transmission.
For their part, appellants contend that the transmit “channels” referred to by Lux are
not the same “channels” to which the instant claimed invention is directed. It is appellants’
position that Lux’s “channels” refer to paths and that this is inconsistent with a “channel”
referring to a band of frequencies of sufficient width for a single radio or television
communication which is the meaning appellants ascribe to the instant invention .
The examiner does not dispute appellants’ definitions and application of these
different meanings to the reference and to the instant invention. The examiner merely
argues that the broad recitation of “multi-channel operation” by claims 1 and 10 “fails
to give any specific definition of the word ‘channel’.” The examiner concludes that
as “broadly as the word ‘channel’ is used in claim 1, Lux clearly reads on it” [answer-page
10].
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007