Appeal No. 2002-1146
Application No. 09/160,634
Appellant argues that the Examiner, in relying on Gagnon for
teaching the movement of the centerline of the antenna in
response to likelihood of interference (col. 2, lines 25-37; col.
6, lines 1-5), improperly characterizes the movement of the
antenna for maximizing its signal quality with the claimed moving
the antenna away from the centerline or the perfect orientation
(brief, page 6). Additionally, Appellant points to the teachings
of the applied references as attempting to maximize the tracking
instead of the claimed mis-tracking the satellite (brief, page
7). Appellant further asserts that Lusignan’s forming nulls in
an antenna transmitting pattern is done by aperture synthesis
(col. 6, line 45) and does not meet the claimed feature of moving
the antenna to apply the beam null to the area of the interfering
satellite (reply brief, pages 1 & 2).
In response to Appellant’s arguments, the Examiner provides
a lengthy discussion of the transmitting pattern of antennas
(answer, pages 8-11) and concludes that the interfering signals
can be taken out of the pattern by moving the antenna and tuning
it to get a better signal (answer, pages 9). The Examiner
further asserts that the claimed moving the antenna away from the
center line of the satellite does not require moving the antenna
away from perfect signal quality (answer, pages 9 & 10).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007