Appeal No. 2004-0925
Application 09/204,734
to produce complex weighting coefficients (c1, c2, c3) (col. 9,
lines 39-61). The traffic despread values are combined using the
complex weighting coefficients (col. 11, lines 5-16).
The appellant argues that Bruckert’s complex weighting
coefficients are not channel coefficient estimates, and that
Bruckert uses the term “channel coefficients” (col. 12, lines 7
and 9) only in a second embodiment which is different from that
in which the complex weighting coefficients are obtained (reply
brief, page 2). In the second embodiment Bruckert refers to the
ci as “weighting coefficients” (col. 11, lines 34-35; col. 13,
lines 17 and 21-22), “combining coefficients” (col. 12, line 5),
“channel coefficients” (col. 12, lines 7 and 9), and
“coefficients” (col. 12, line 16). Thus, Bruckert indicates that
his weighting coefficients properly can be considered channel
coefficients. Moreover, the appellant’s specification indicates
that like Bruckert’s coefficients, the appellant’s channel
coefficients are complex coefficients and function as weighting
coefficients (page 7, lines 6-12; page 8, lines 26-28). The
record, therefore, indicates that Bruckert’s complex weighting
coefficients are the same as the appellant’s channel
coefficients.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007