Appeal No. 2000-1556
Application No. 08/771,426
Based on these well-settled principals, we disagree with the
Examiner that, because the overlapping capability of cells
operating on different hyperbands means that any overlapping
cells should operate on different hyperbands, one of ordinary
skill in the art would have found it obvious to combine the
admitted prior art with Leung. The admitted prior art, in fact,
merely points to the existence of overlapping or adjacent cells
in different hyperbands and it is the claimed invention that
provides the details of how to configure the communications
system and the mobile station to move between cells and between
different hyperbands. Furthermore, we agree with Appellants that
the desire to provide more services would not have taught or
motivated one of ordinary skill in the art to operate Leung’s
macrocell and microcell systems on different hyperbands. In that
regard, while the existence of multiple hyperbands for mobile
communications is taught by the admitted prior art, we find no
suggestion in the prior art for implementing operation in
multiple hyperbands of admitted prior art in the macrocells and
microcells system of Leung.
In view of our analysis above, we find that the Examiner has
failed to set forth a prima facie case of obviousness because the
necessary teachings and suggestions for combining Leung with the
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007