Appeal 2007-0636
Application 10/351,016
ISSUES
The pivotal issues in the appeal before us are as follows:
(1) Have Appellants shown that the Examiner has failed to establish that the
disclosure of Louwagie anticipates the claimed invention under 35
U.S.C. § 102(b), when Louwagie teaches a line card having a resistor
coupled to a backplane chassis or a jumper coupled across signal lines?
(2) Have Appellants shown that the Examiner has failed to establish that
one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the present invention,
would have found that the combined disclosures of Louwagie and
Dewey render the claimed invention unpatentable under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a)?
FINDINGS OF FACT
The following findings of fact are supported by a preponderance of the
evidence.
The invention
1. Appellants invented a method and system for using a line card in any
chassis that has a termination resistor3 built in the backplane of the chassis,
3 For proper operation of a DSX system, DSX lines must be coupled with a
termination resistor in the backplane of the chassis. Therefore, a legacy
chassis including a backplane with a built in resistor is generally used for
DSX applications. If such backplane does not have a built in resistor, a
termination resistor of a coupling line card is used to enable such
applications to properly operate. However, DSL lines do not require the use
of such a termination resistor. In any event, whenever a termination resistor
is deemed to be unnecessary for a DSL or DSX application to run properly, a
jumper is used across connector contacts in the line card to bypass such
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013