Ex Parte EIDSON et al - Page 2



          Appeal No. 2003-0340                                                        
          Application No. 09/096,403                                                  

          The disclosed invention pertains to a network for                           
          connecting a plurality of devices and to a fan-out device for use           
          in the network.                                                             
          Representative claim 33 is reproduced as follows:                           
               33. A fan-out device comprising a top port and a plurality             
          of downstream ports, said fan-out device comprising:                        
               a plurality of summing circuits, one said summing circuit              
          being associated with each of said ports; and                               
               a plurality of signal receiving circuits, one of said signal           
          receiving circuits being associated with each of said ports,                
          wherein each of said summing circuits generates a signal                    
          comprising the sum of all of the signals received by said signal            
          receiving circuits that are not associated with that port.                  
          The examiner relies on the following references:                            
          Kim                          6,147,682            Nov. 14, 2000             
          (filed May  07, 1997)                                                       
          Pasternak et al. (Pasternak) 6,157,614            Dec. 05, 2000             
          (filed Oct. 22, 1997)                                                       
          Claims 33, 36 and 37 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                         
          § 102(e) as being anticipated by the disclosure of Pasternak.               
          Claims 1-32, 34, 35 and 38-49 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                
          § 103.  As evidence of obviousness the examiner offers Pasternak            
          in view of Kim.                                                             
          Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants or the                       
          examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the answer for the            
          respective details thereof.                                                 

                                          2                                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007