Appeal No. 2002-1138
Application No. 09/362,785
OPINION
Appellants argue that instant claim 1 distinguishes over Sanders because the
reference does not disclose a signal measurement circuit responsive to “an upstream
side of the cable network.” In particular, in the embodiment of appellants’ invention as
shown in instant Figure 2, signal measurement circuit 225 couples to the network side
of the media access controller 210. (Brief at 5.) Appellants assert that Sanders fails to
teach this feature.
The examiner reiterates how instant claim 1 is thought to read on the apparatus
of Sanders. (Answer at 3-4.) Appellants respond that the artisan would not consider a
transmission from the modem 102 of Sanders to be on the upstream side of the cable
network unless it was on the network cable 112 side of the directional coupler 218.
(Reply Brief at 2.)
Appellants’ specification notes (p. 9, ll. 3-6), “[a]s used herein, the term
‘upstream side’ refers to communications to the CMTS 130 from a cable modem 100
and the term ‘downstream side’ refers to communications from the CMTS 130 to the
cable modem 100.” Sanders also speaks of “upstream transmissions” as being
transmissions from customer premises to the network, and “downstream transmissions”
as being from the network to customer premises. Col. 1, ll. 22-26.
The broadest reasonable interpretation of “upstream side” and “downstream
side,” in light of appellants’ disclosure and the prior art before us, refers to direction of
transmission, rather than to any particular apparatus or any particular physical location.
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007