Appeal 2007-1115
Application 10/150,145
claim, for a court can take account of the inferences and creative steps that a
person of ordinary skill in the art would employ.” KSR Int’l v. Teleflex Inc.,
127 S. Ct. 1727, 1741, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007) (quoting In re Kahn,
441 F.3d 977, 988, 78 USPQ2d 1329, 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2006)).
With respect to independent claim 8, we find that this claim is
directed to a mobile station that is upgraded or downgraded in accordance
with received messages. We find that our previous discussion of Czaja
shows that the mobile station of Czaja configures its “rake” receiver to
receive the 2G signal from a base station in a 2G/3G handoff and then may
reconfigure the fingers of the receiver to the 3G base stations afterwards.
Therefore, we find that the backwards compatibility of the 3G mobile station
would have had “a memory coupled to the control processor having code or
instructions for directing the control processor to upgrade or downgrade a
mobile protocol data unit format revision in use during soft handoff
according to received messages” which would have modified the rake
receiver and the processing of the received signal accordingly. Therefore,
we will sustain the rejection of independent claim 8 over the combination of
Gilhousen in view of Czaja.
With respect to independent claims 9-12, we find that each
independent claim recites limitations that the base station configures or
downgrades the protocol data unit revision format to communicate at a lower
protocol data unit revision format. As discussed above, we find that Czaja
does not teach reconfiguring the base station and from our review of the
teachings of Gilhousen, we agree with the Appellants that Gilhousen does
not remedy the deficiency (Br. 14). Therefore, we find that the Examiner
has not established the requisite initial showing of all the claimed elements
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013