Appeal No. 2001-1926
Application 08/777,722
apparent that a plurality of switch nodes exist in Figure 1 of
Bales, the examiner has not attempted to correlate teachings and
suggestions of Bales to a required first application for
controlling continuously various call functions of wireless calls
and separately for controlling in a similar first application
separately recited handset functions, both of which are recited
to exist initially in claim 12 on appeal in the first recited
switch node. The claim additionally requires at least second
handset functions to exist but in a second switch node such as to
effect a handoff of handset functions between the first to the
second node. It is thus apparent at the end of the claim on
appeal that the control of the call functions themselves remains
with the first application stated to exist in the first node such
as to continue the control of the wireless call there rather than
at the second stated node.
Notwithstanding the fact that Figure 1 of Bales clearly
shows plural switch nodes 101 and 130, the examiner has made no
attempt to correlate these listed recited functions of
representative claim 12 on appeal to the teachings and showings
of Bales himself. Indeed, a labeled TMA functions within both
of the switch nodes shown in Figure 1 and relates only to
terminal management application functions, and the TEA portions
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007