Appeal 2007-1267
Application 09-967617
Rejection of Claim 5 over Sklar in view of Hassan
Appellants contend that Examiner erred in rejecting claim 5 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a). Specifically, Appellants contend that Hassan does not
specifically describe that the varying data rates correspond to the plurality of
dynamic links. We find that Hassan teaches that the satellites and terminals
each communicate using a variety of data rates (Hassan, Col. 6, ll. 62), and
this teaching is reasonably combinable with Sklar. In view of this teaching,
claim 5 is rendered obvious as rejected.
Rejection of Claim 6 over Sklar in view of Nouri
Appellants contend that Examiner erred in rejecting claim 6 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a). Nouri teaches the claimed router in an application for
signal processing. Appellants have pointed out omissions in the Nouri
reference that were clearly recited by the Examiner to be in the Sklar
reference, which is part of this rejection. As the “omitted” elements were
pointed out with respect to claim 1, we do not find error in the rejection of
this claim.
Rejection of Claim 7 over Sklar in view of Nouri and Hassan
With respect to the rejection of Claim 7 under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) over
Sklar in view of Nouri in further view of Hassan, Appellants repeat the
argument concerning datagrams and plurality of dynamic links discussed
with respect to Claim 1. We do not find error with this rejection.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013