Appeal No. 2005-2429 Page 7
Application No. 10/069,612
Id. at ll. 11-34. Based on these parts of the reference, we agree with the appellants that
"Barzegar's teachings with regard to bandwidth on demand simply relate to giving
bandwidth allocation priority to voice calls over data transfers (i.e., if an available
channel does not exist when a new voice call comes in, a channel may deallocated from
data usage for allocation to the new voice call since voice usage has a higher priority
than data usage)." (Appeal Br. at 12.)
Once the reference's ISD, FMP, and NSP have allocated bandwidth to a voice
call, we are unpersuaded that Barzegar's architecture can adjust a variable capacity
parameter for the call. To the contrary, "the capacity parameter for the vocal dialing
appears to be fixed. . . ." (Appeal Br. at 11.) Absent a teaching or suggestion of
adjusting a variable capacity parameter for vocal commanding based on an indication
signal, we are unpersuaded of a prima facie case of obviousness.
Regardless of whether Barzegar's provision of bandwidth on demand adjusts a
variable capacity parameter for a call, the examiner admits that "Barzegar do[es] not
expressly discloses combining speech recognition for spoken commanding and
bandwidth-on-demand together for implementing functionality as the claimed
'said speech recognizer comprising an adjustor for adjusting a variable capacity
parameter for said vocal commanding based on said indication signal detected by said
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007