Appeal No. 2005-0261
Application No. 09/682,473
receiver circuit to output a local clock signal as claimed. The
examiner cites Matsumoto as teaching a receiver circuit to output
a local clock signal by generating a differential sinusoidal
signal pair as claimed. The examiner finds that it would have
been obvious to the artisan to incorporate the teachings of
Matsumoto into that of Wissell [answer, pages 3-4].
Appellants argue that their specification defines a
“differential sinusoidal signal pair” as a pair of sinusoidal
waveforms that are substantially 180 degrees out of phase with
each other, whereas the signals taught by Wissell are quadrature
related and differ by only 90 degrees. Appellants also argue
that Matsumoto has nothing to do with generating a clock signal.
Appellants argue that the only motivation to combine Wissell with
Matsumoto in the manner proposed by the examiner is appellants’
own specification. Finally, appellants argue that the functions
of the Wissell apparatus would be destroyed if the apparatus were
modified as suggested by the examiner [brief, pages 5-9].
The examiner responds that any pair of signals having
significant non-overlapped portions can be considered as being
“differential.” The examiner argues, therefore, that a pair of
differential sinusoidal signals do not have to be 180 degrees
apart. The examiner cites a patent to Rabii to support this
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007