Ex Parte FUNK et al - Page 2



          Appeal No. 2000-1593                                                         
          Application 08/724,459                                                       

          radio transceiver to be received within a PCMCIA slot.                       
          Representative claim 1 is reproduced as follows:                             
               1.  A wireless modem comprising:                                        
               a radio transceiver having a first interface and a second               
          interface, the second interface allowing the radio transceiver to            
          be received within a PCMCIA slot;                                            
               a baseband modem having a first interface; and                          
               means for establishing communication between the radio                  
          transceiver through the first interface thereof and the baseband             
          modem through the first interface thereof.                                   
          The examiner relies on the following references:                             
          Robinson et al. (Robinson)    5,544,222          Aug. 06, 1996               
          Suomi et al. (Suomi)          5,657,371          Aug. 12, 1997               
          (filed Aug. 26, 1996)                                                        
          Gradeler                      5,701,515          Dec. 23, 1997               
          (filed June 16, 1994)                                                        
          Claims 1-4 and 6-8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103.                     
          As evidence of obviousness the examiner offers Suomi in view of              
          Gradeler with respect to claims 1 and 6-8, and the examiner adds             
          Robinson with respect to claims 2-4.                                         
          Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants or the                        
          examiner, we make reference to the brief and the answer for the              
          respective details thereof.                                                  
          OPINION                                                                      
          We have carefully considered the subject matter on                           
          appeal, the rejections advanced by the examiner and the evidence             
                                           2                                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007