Ex Parte Buda et alDownload PDFBoard of Patent Appeals and InterferencesJun 27, 201110359218 (B.P.A.I. Jun. 27, 2011) Copy Citation UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www.uspto.gov APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 10/359,218 02/06/2003 Fabien Buda 0023-0160 9474 44987 7590 06/28/2011 HARRITY & HARRITY, LLP 11350 Random Hills Road SUITE 600 FAIRFAX, VA 22030 EXAMINER HAILE, FEBEN ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2474 MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE 06/28/2011 PAPER Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication. PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ____________ BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS AND INTERFERENCES ____________ Ex parte FABIEN BUDA and BERTRAND DEBRAY ____________ Appeal 2009-009336 Application 10/359,218 Technology Center 2400 ____________ Before, ALLEN R. MacDONALD, CARLA M. KRIVAK, and THOMAS S. HAHN, Administrative Patent Judges. KRIVAK, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from a final rejection of claims 1, 3-12, and 14-24. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We reverse. Appeal 2009-009336 Application 10/359,218 2 STATEMENT OF THE CASE Appellants’ claimed invention is a time-division multiplex access (TDMA) receiver that monitors the spectrum of an incoming time-division multiplex signal. Independent claim 1, reproduced below, is representative of the subject matter on appeal. 1. A device comprising: a controller for allocating, to each of a plurality of transmitters, time intervals during which the transmitter is allowed to transmit signals, a receiver for receiving an incoming signal, in a predetermined frequency band, resulting from multiplexing of signals from said plurality of transmitters during said time intervals, the incoming signal being a TDM (time division multiplexed) signal in the predetermined frequency band, a processor for extracting and processing said TDM signal, and spectrum determination means for determining the spectrum of the incoming signal, wherein the controller is configured to synchronize the operation of the spectrum determination means as a function of the time intervals allocated to the transmitters for the determination of the spectrum of the incoming signal during one or more time intervals not allocated to any of the plurality of transmitters. REJECTIONS The Examiner rejected claims 1, 3-6, 11, 12, 14-17, 23, and 24 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based upon the teachings of Appellants’ Admitted Prior Art (AAPA), Min (US 2003/0021237 A1), and Naegeli (US 6,895,043 B1). Appeal 2009-009336 Application 10/359,218 3 The Examiner rejected claims 7-10 and 18-22 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based upon the teachings of AAPA, Min, Naegeli, and Azenkot (US 2002/0154620 A1). ANALYSIS The Examiner relies on Min for teaching unique time slots allocated to each subscriber (Ans. 19). The Examiner relies on Naegeli for teaching a controller synchronizing a determination of spectrum during an interval not allocated to any transmitter (dummy slots) (Ans. 19). The Examiner finds AAPA teaches the remaining elements of Appellants’ claimed invention (Ans. 3-4). Appellants contend Min discloses allocating time slots to subscribers for transmitting information across a single frequency channel (Min, ¶¶[0055]-[0056]). Min also “discloses synchronizing a spectral analysis during a time interval allotted to a transmitter” (App. Br. 9, 11; Reply Br. 3, 4; Min ¶ [0060])). Appellants further contend Naegeli “discloses taking an FFT of an upstream spectrum at a time when a cable modem being tested will be transmitting data (column 10, lines 5-7)” (Reply Br. 3-4). Appellants then assert since: Min discloses synchronizing a spectral analysis during a time interval allotted to a transmitter and Naegeli discloses taking an FFT of an upstream spectrum at a time when a cable modem being tested will be transmitting data, the combination of Min and Naegeli cannot disclose or suggest a controller that is configured to synchronize the operation of the spectrum determination means as a function of the time intervals allocated to the transmitters for the determination of the spectrum of the incoming signal during one or more time Appeal 2009-009336 Application 10/359,218 4 intervals not allocated to any of the plurality of transmitters, as recited in claim 1. (Reply Br. 4) We agree with Appellants that Min and Naegeli do not disclose or suggest synchronizing a spectrum determination “during one or more time intervals not allocated to any of the plurality of transmitters” (emphasis added) as claimed. All the independent claims recite this limitation. Thus, claims 1, 12, and 23, and claims 3-11, 14-22, and 24, which depend therefrom, are not obvious over the cited references. CONCLUSION The Examiner erred in rejecting claims 1, 3-12, and 14-24 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). DECISION The Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1, 3-12, and 14-24 is reversed. No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv)(2010). REVERSED kis Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation