Appeal No. 2001-1871
Application No. 09/082,449
We agree with the examiner to the extent that the “true” values of the second
intermediate frequency signal (fL2) stored in table 34 may correspond to the claimed
nominal frequency of the carrier. Toda col. 4, ll. 45-52; col. 5, ll. 30-42. However,
whether the “phase-locked loop’s oscillator” is taken to be reference oscillator 36, as
submitted by the rejection, or taken to be VCO 271 (Fig. 6) in PLL 27 (Fig. 4), we do not
find disclosure or suggestion where the frequency of either is measured and compared
to the frequency values stored in table 34; i.e., that a frequency difference such as that
claimed is to be measured.
Independent claims 1 and 6 contain versions of the features we find lacking in
the rejection with respect to claim 7. The section 103 rejection relying on Toda in view
of Mogi, however, appears to represent a shift in position when compared to the section
102 rejection over Toda. “Toda differs from the claimed invention in that the oscillator is
included in the PLL.” (Answer at 4.) Mogi is asserted to teach “that a reference
oscillator can be incorporated in a PLL.” (Id.)
However, neither the section 102 nor the section 103 rejection shows disclosure
or suggestion of measuring a frequency difference between a nominal frequency of the
carrier and a frequency of a phase-locked loop’s oscillator, as required by claim 1 and
claim 6.
We thus do not sustain the rejections of claims 1-3 and 5-7.
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007