Ex Parte OH - Page 2




            Appeal No. 2002-0992                                                                              
            Application No. 09/116,018                                                                        


            Division Multiple Access (CDMA) mobile communications system.  The invention serves               
            to eliminate interference signals received at a different angle than the reception angle of       
            the desired signal as well as multiple access interference signals included in signals            
            received at the reception angle of the desired signal.                                            
                   Representative claim 1 is reproduced as follows:                                           
                   1.  A receiving method in a Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) mobile                    
            communications system, comprising the steps of:                                                   
                         controlling beam patterns and directions of an adaptive array antenna to             
            coincide with a reception direction of a desired signal;                                          
                         forming a beam in the reception direction of the desired signal;                     
                         eliminating an interference signal received at a different angle than the            
            reception angle of the desired signal; and                                                        
                         eliminating multiple access interference signals included in signals                 
            received at the reception angle of the desired signal.                                            

                   The examiner relies on the following references:                                           
            Talwar                           5,152,010          Sep. 29, 1992                                 
            Raleigh et al. (Raleigh)         6,101,399          Aug, 08, 2000                                 
            (filed June 16, 1995)                                                                             
                   Claims 1-12 and 16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).  As evidence of                
            obviousness the examiner offers Raleigh in view of Talwar.                                        


                   Rather than repeat the arguments of appellant or the examiner, we make                     
            reference to the main brief and the answer for the respective details thereof.                    
                                                      2                                                       





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007