Appeal 2007-1115
Application 10/150,145
reconfiguring the second base station to communicate at the
higher protocol data unit format revision in use by the second base
station before configuration; and
exchanging signaling frames between the mobile station and the
second base station using the higher protocol data unit format revision
in use by the second base station before configuration.
PRIOR ART
The prior art references of record relied upon by the Examiner in
rejecting the appealed claims are:
Gilhousen 5,101,501 Mar. 31, 1992
Czaja 6,567,666 B2
(filed May 20, 1999)
REJECTIONS
Claims 2-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by
Czaja.
Claims 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Gilhousen in view of Czaja.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the
Examiner and the Appellants regarding the above-noted rejection, we make
reference to the Examiner's Answer (mailed Oct. 20, 2006) for the reasoning
in support of the rejections, and to Appellants’ Brief (filed Jul. 12, 2006) and
Reply Brief (filed Dec. 20, 2006) for the arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful
consideration to Appellants’ Specification and claims, to the applied prior art
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013