Appeal 2007-0636
Application 10/351,016
22. A method of terminating signal lines, the method comprising:
coupling signal lines to a chassis;
when a backplane of the chassis includes a backplane termination
resistor, terminating signals with the backplane termaination resistor; and
when the backplance of the chassis does not include a backplane
termination resistor, terminating the signals with a line card termination
resistor contained on a line card.
In rejecting the claims on appeal, the Examiner relied upon the
following prior art:
Dewey US 5,199,878 Apr. 6, 1993
Louwagie US 5,582,525 Dec. 10, 1996
The Examiner rejected the claims on appeal as follows:
A. Claims 1 through 4, 7, 10 through 13, 15 through 19, 22 through 24,
29, 30 and 32 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated
by Louwagie.
B. Claims 5, 6, 8, 9, 14, 20, 21, 25 through 28 and 31 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Louwagie and Dewey.1
Appellants contend2 that Louwagie does not anticipate claims 1
through 4, 7, 10 through 13, 15 through 19, 22 through 24, 29, 30 and 32.
1 We note that Louwagie incorporates by reference the teachings of Dewey.
See Louwagie at col. 2, ll. 44 through 47.
2 This decision considers only those arguments that Appellants submitted in
the Appeal and Reply Briefs. Arguments that Appellants could have made
but chose not to make in the Briefs are deemed to have been waived. See 37
C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1) (vii)(eff. Sept. 13, 2004). See also In re Watts, 354
F.3d 1362, 1368, 69 USPQ2d 1453, 1458 (Fed. Cir. 2004).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013