Appeal No. 2001-2018
Application No. 08/668,114
respective positions of appellant and the examiner.
OPINION
At the outset, we note that, in accordance with appellant’s
grouping of claims, at page 4 of the principal brief, claims 2, 8
and 10 will stand or fall with claim 12 and claims 9 and 11 will
stand or fall with claim 13.
Taking claim 12, and comparing the elements thereof to
Figure 2 of Worsham, we note that the reference discloses a
demodulator 15 comprising first and second branches with a phase
shifting network 31 in one branch and the phase shifting network
coupled to a multiplier means 32. Worsham also discloses a
capacitor 30 and an inductor 33, wherein the junction of these
elements is connected as the output of the phase shifting network
for providing a quadrature signal to the multiplier.
In fact, Worsham appears to disclose the claimed subject
matter but for the disclosure of a resistor in series with the
capacitor 30 and wherein the resistor provides a damping such
that the overall quality factor of the phase shifting network is
substantially smaller than a quality factor of the inductor.
The examiner recognized this difference and applied
-3–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007