Appeal No. 1999-1697
Application No. 08/550,270 Page 7
With respect to appellants' assertion that neither Hartley
nor Blackwell discloses a single programmable DSP which can
activate all of the plurality of transceiving means, and that
Blackwell discloses two DSPs 370 and 308 (brief, page 8), the
examiner takes the position (answer, pages 10 and 11) that the
issue is moot because the language "one or all of said
transceiving means can be activated . . . " reads of either of
Blackwell or Hartley alone since each discloses one transceiving
means which can be activated by a DSP means. The examiner adds
that the claims do not require a single DSP to activate a
plurality of transceivers. From our review of the claim, we do
not agree with the examiner's interpretation of the claim and
interpret the recited claim language as requiring the single DSP
to be able to activate the plural transceiving means.
The examiner, in the alternative, asserts (answer, pages 11
and 12) that in figures 4 and 5 of Blackwell, since processor 370
performs control functions for the analog interface via bus 64,
the functionality of the processors is not entirely separate.
We note at the outset that the examiner has not addressed
the issue of whether both data pump 308 and processor 370
constitute two DSPs for controlling analog and digital signal
processing in figures 4 and 5 of Blackwell. From our review of
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007