Appeal No. 2002-1326
Application 09/152,759
actually made by appellants have been considered in this
decision. Arguments which appellants could have made but chose
not to make in the brief have not been considered and are deemed
to be waived by appellants [see 37 CFR § 1.192(a)].
With respect to representative, independent claim 1, the
examiner essentially finds that Merakos teaches the claimed
invention except that Merakos does not specifically teach
simultaneous voice and non-voice transmission on the same channel
to the same mobile unit. The examiner cites Dent as teaching the
simultaneous transmission of voice data and digital data to a
mobile unit. The examiner finds that it would have been obvious
to the artisan to apply the simultaneous voice/data communication
in Dent to the system of Merakos [answer, pages 3-5].
Appellants make several arguments which all relate to
their fundamental position that the applied prior art fails to
teach the automatic broadening of a primary transmission band for
a mobile unit to encompass both a primary time interval and an
adjacent secondary time interval so that voice and non-voice data
may be processed as a single transmitted unit over a single
dedicated radio frequency channel [brief, pages 5-8].
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007