Appeal No. 2002-1146
Application No. 09/160,634
We make reference to the answer (Paper No. 13, mailed April
10, 2001)2 for the Examiner’s reasoning, and to the appeal brief
(Paper No. 12, filed December 29, 2000) and the reply brief
(Paper No. 14, filed June 28, 2001) for Appellant’s arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
The Examiner relies on Kurby for teaching a satellite
communications system having a controller that can direct the
position of a movable antenna based on signal quality
measurements (answer, pages 3 & 4). The Examiner, however,
relies on Gagnon for disclosing the control of the antenna based
on the determined interference between a satellite being
monitored and another satellite and on Lusignan for teaching the
existence of null positions within an antenna pattern (answer,
page 4). The Examiner further takes the position that the
combination would have taught the claimed subject matter to one
of ordinary skill in the art since moving “a centerline of said
antenna away from the satellite being monitored, and toward said
null” would mitigate the interference between the base station
and the interfering satellite (answer, page 5).
2The answer was re-mailed on May 25, 2001.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007