Appeal 2007-1481
Application 09/915,091
free of interference (FF 6), but contend that Van De Berg does not consider
interference detected at any other carrier frequency position in the pass / fail
decision of step 4 (Fig. 7). Appellants further argue that Van De Berg
necessarily does not teach the step of “selecting the plurality of frequency
bands for the desired wireless communication in response to the signal
quality indication,” since it is alleged that Van De Berg does not teach the
signal quality indication claimed.
We are not persuaded by Appellants’ argument. As illustrated in
Figure 7, Van De Berg scans a plurality of frequency bands in search of a
sufficiently large contiguous set of bands useful for wireless communication
(FF 6, 7). Each carrier frequency band is monitored for the presence of
interference (Fig. 7, step 3; FF 6). If a particular carrier frequency position
is essentially free of interference, the system proceeds to determine if
enough successive positions are also essentially free of interference, until a
sufficiently wide interference-free bandwidth has been identified (Fig. 7,
step 6; FF 7). At that point, wireless communication is established (Fig. 7,
step 8; FF 8). If a carrier frequency position having interference is
encountered (Fig. 7, step 4), the system of Van De Berg must begin scanning
again with the next carrier frequency position, in an attempt to identify
sufficient interference-free bandwidth (FF 9). We construe Van De Berg’s
process of continuing to scan carrier frequency positions for interference,
after one or more interference-free channels have been noted, to meet the
claim limitation of “combining the interference information,” because Van
De Berg must “combine” the “interference information” consisting of the
detection of a contiguous plurality of interference-free bands in order to
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013