Appeal 2007-0357
Application 10/180,862
The following references are relied on by the Examiner:
Onosaka US 5,961,608 Oct. 5, 1999
Liu US 6,345,072 B1 Feb. 5, 2002
Miller US 6,529,975 B1 Mar. 4, 2003
(Filed November 2, 1999)
Intel Corporation “Audio Codec ‘97” Revision 2.1, May 22, 1998, pp.
1-108. (Intel)
Claims 1 through 15 and 18 through 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(e) as being anticipated by Intel. Claims 16 and 17 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103. As evidence of obviousness, the Examiner relies
upon Intel in view of Onosaka.
Rather than repeat the positions of the Appellants and the Examiner,
reference is made to the Brief and Reply Brief for Appellants’ positions, and
to the Answer for the Examiner’s positions.
OPINION
For the reasons set forth by the Examiner in the Answer, as expanded
upon here, we sustain the rejections of the noted claims under 35 U.S.C.
§§ 102 and 103.
At the outset, we note that Appellants’ discussion of the prior art at
Specification pages 1 and 2 admits that the bulk of the structure set forth in
figures 1, 2, and 4 was known in the art. These include the fact that
notebook PCs were known in the art to include mother boards and daughter
cards to which are attached plural devices, all within the structure of being
connected to the well known mini PCI (Peripheral Component Interconnect)
bus structures. Plural modems are also noted to be connected to this bus.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013