Appeal No. 2001-0603
Application 09/028,063
Rejections At Issue
Claims 2, 4, 13, 15, 19 and 20 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Green and further in
view of Baghdady. Claims 17 and 21 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Tong in view of Baghdady.
Rather than repeat the arguments of Appellant or the
Examiner we make reference to the brief and answer the respected
details thereof.
OPINION
With full consideration being given to the subject matter on
appeal, the Examiner’s rejections and the arguments of Appellant
and the Examiner for the reason state infra, we reversed the
Examiner’s rejection of claims 2, 4, 13, 15, 17 and 19 through 21
under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
We will first address the rejection of claims 2, 4, 13, 15,
19 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Green
in view of Baghdady. The Examiner states that Green discloses an
adcock type array, but does not disclose the detection of a
spectrally spread signal and the problems encountered in
detecting these type of signals. See page 3 of the Examiner’s
answer. Examiner states that Baghdady teaches a method for
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007