Appeal 2006-2624
Application 10/223,246
Rather than repeat the positions of the Appellants and the Examiner,
reference is made to the Brief (no Reply Brief has been filed) for Appellants’
positions, and to the Answer for the Examiner’s positions.
OPINION
We affirm-in-part.
Noting again that Appellants have not filed a Reply Brief in this
appeal, we also observe that Appellants have not presented any arguments in
the brief as to the second and third stated rejections noted earlier
respectively relying upon Jensen and Park. Note page 11 of the Brief.
There appears to be no dispute between the Examiner and Appellants
that Nakanishi does in fact teach the subject matter of independent claims 1
and 10 on appeal, except for the feature of an indicator for indicating a TSSI.
Nakanishi’s teachings encompass the use of a telephone as recited in
dependent claim 21 according to the teachings of mobile radio environments
at Specification page 1, lines 1 through 9 and the discussion beginning at
column 14, line 51 to the end of Nakanishi’s Patent.
The Examiner relies upon Durkota for the use of a watt meter 112 in
figure 2 to monitor the power levels of the antenna 102. Contrary to some
arguments of Appellants in the Brief, the Examiner does not rely upon the
video display 189 within the portable test unit 103 for display of a power
level feature even through the telemetry data from the onboard test system
105 does communicate watt meter-type information through the telemetry
transmitter 151 to the telemetry antenna 156 within the portable test system
103 for display on the video display 189.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013