Appeal No. 2002-1043
Application 08/784,860
Throughout our opinion, we make reference to the briefs1 and
answer.
OPINION
With full consideration being given to the subject matter on
appeal, the Examiner’s rejections and the arguments of Appellants
and the Examiner, for the reason stated infra, we reverse the
Examiner’s rejection of claims 1 through 11 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103.
We will first address the Examiner’s rejection of claims 1,
2, 5 and 6 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Serizawa and Mahany. Appellants point out that Appellants’ claim
1 requires
a plurality of mobile terminals each capable of receiving
messages selectably at a first data rate and a second data
rate, and transmitting messages at a third data rate, said
first data rate being greater than both said second and
third data rates . . . said base station sends said mobile
terminal a control message at said second data rate, said
control message specifying said first data rate for
subsequent messages to said mobile terminal.
See page 6 of Appellants’ brief. Appellants argue that the
1 Appellants filed an appeal brief on March 19, 2001.
Appellants filed a reply brief on July 6, 2001. The Examiner
mailed out an Office communication on October 30, 2001, stating
that the reply brief has been acknowledged. We note that the
reply brief has been entered into the record.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007