Appeal No. 2005-0171
Application No. 10/064,380
It is this control signal that Carroll’s transponder 40 transmits
to controller 10, which extracts this bit-timing data and
utilizes it to develop a bit-timing signal which is embedded in
the data transmitted (Carroll, Figure 4B) from the controller 10
to the transponder 40. As we stated in our earlier decision,
there is no claimed requirement that the bit-timing control
signal originate in Carroll’s controller as argued by Appellants.
With respect to claim 71, we also find no error in our
original decision which concluded that language in the claim
preamble which recites that a bit-timing clock signal originates
with the interrogator be given no patentable weight since there
is no clear indication that the generation of a bit-timing clock
signal in the body of the claim refers back to the claim
preamble. We don’t necessarily disagree with Appellants’
argument (Request, pages 8 and 9) that there must be an initial
establishment of interrogator-tag communication which originates
in the interrogator. It is apparent, however, from our reading
of Carroll that, in the ongoing communication between the
controller (interrogator) and the transponder (tag), the
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007