Ex Parte Behzad

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Feb 22, 2013

11168831 (P.T.A.B. Feb. 22, 2013)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
____________

Ex parte ARYA REZA BEHZAD
____________

Appeal 2010-007147
Application 11/168,831
Technology Center 2600
____________

Before JOSEPH L. DIXON, ST. JOHN COURTENAY III, and
CARLA M. KRIVAK, Administrative Patent Judges.

KRIVAK, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from a final rejection of
claims 1-22. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We reverse.

Appeal 2010-007147
Application 11/168,831

2
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellant’s claimed invention is directed to radio frequency (RF)
integrated circuits (ICs) used in wireless communication devices (Spec.
1:14-16).
Independent claim 1, reproduced below, is illustrative.
1. A Radio Frequency (RF) transceiver Integrated
Circuit (IC) comprising:

a first RF transceiver group;

a first baseband section communicatively coupled to the
first RF transceiver group;

a second RF transceiver group residing in substantial
symmetry with the first RF transceiver group about a center line
of symmetry of the RF transceiver IC;

a second baseband section communicatively coupled to
the second RF transceiver group;

local oscillation generation circuitry; and

local oscillation distribution circuitry operably coupled to
the local oscillation generation circuitry, to the first RF
transceiver group, and to the second RF transceiver group.

REFERENCES and REJECTIONS
The Examiner rejected claims 1-4 and 7-22 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
based upon the teachings of Zhang (US Patent Application Publication No.
2006/0063494 Al, published March 23, 2006, filed March 07, 2005) and
Nguyen (US Patent No. 6,154,051, issued November 28, 2000, filed
November 5, 1998).
Appeal 2010-007147
Application 11/168,831

3
The Examiner rejected claims 5 and 6 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based
upon the teachings of Zhang, Nguyen, and Hansen (US Patent Application
Publication No. 2005/0013238 Al, published January 20, 2005, filed July 16,
2004).

ANALYSIS
The issue in this case is whether, under § 103, the Examiner erred in
finding the combination of Zhang and Nguyen teaches or suggests “a second
RF transceiver group residing in substantial symmetry with the first RF
transceiver group about a center line of symmetry of the RF transceiver IC”
as recited in claim 1.
The Examiner finds Zhang teaches all the features of Appellant’s
claimed invention except for a second RF transceiver group residing in
substantial symmetry with a first RF transceiver group about a center line of
symmetry of a RF transceiver IC (Ans. 4). The Examiner then finds Nguyen
discloses “making mirror-symmetrical arrangements of sets of repeated logic
and interconnect structures and common control sections on an IC” (Ans. 5)
(citation omitted). Thus, the Examiner asserts, it would have been obvious to
modify the RF transceiver of Zhang with the mirror-symmetric arrangement
of Nguyen to “provide an efficient layout with uniformly distributed and
balanced skew and wiring” (id.).
Appellant contends there is no reference to symmetry or mirror-
symmetrical arrangements in Zhang (Reply Br. 10) and that Nguyen
discloses logic blocks arranged in symmetry about a respective common
control section (col. 2, ll. 64-67). Thus, the symmetry in Nguyen is with
respect to a plurality of logic blocks relative to a common control section
Appeal 2010-007147
Application 11/168,831

4
and not with respect to a center line of an IC as claimed (App. Br. 27; Reply
Br. 13). We agree with Appellant that neither Nguyen, nor Zhang, teaches or
suggests “a second RF transceiver group residing in substantial symmetry
with the first RF transceiver group about a central line of symmetry of the
RF transceiver IC,” as recited in claim 1 (emphasis added).
Thus, for the above reasons, we conclude the combination of Zhang
and Nguyen does not teach or suggest “a second RF transceiver group
residing in substantial symmetry with the first RF transceiver group about a
center line of symmetry of the RF transceiver IC” as recited in claim 1 and
similarly recited in claims 14 and 21. Hansen does not cure the deficiencies
of Zhang and Nguyen, thus, dependent claims 2-13, 15-20, and 22 are also
not obvious over the combination of these references.

DECISION
The Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1-22 is reversed.

REVERSED

peb/llw