Ex Parte Kim et al

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Apr 30, 2010

10748168 (B.P.A.I. Apr. 30, 2010)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________

Ex parte YONG-SUK KIM, WON-YONG YOON, KYUN-HYON
TCHAH, DOO-SEOP EOM, WON-HEE LEE,
TAE-JIN LEE, and YANG-ICK JOO

_____________

Appeal 2009-011343
Application 10/748,168
Technology Center 2600
____________

Decided: April 30, 2010
____________

Before NAPPI E. ROBERT, ELENI MANTIS MERCADER,
and BRADLEY W. BAUMEISTER, Administrative Patent Judges.

MANTIS MERCADER, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL

Appeal 2009-0011343
Application 10/748,168
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Final Rejection
of claims 1-16. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We reverse.
INVENTION
Appellants’ claimed invention is directed to a short-range
communication system and a handoff processing method capable of
preventing the lowering of throughputs even though handoffs occur in poor
wireless channel environments so that the deteriorations of service quality
can be prevented. (Spec. [0014]).
More particularly, when a moving mobile terminal sets up a new
connection with a new Access Point (AP; in Fig. 4 (S450)), the new AP
transmits an acknowledgement signal (INC-ACK) of handoff completion
and link re-establishment to a microcontroller (30). Thereafter the
microcontroller (30) forwards the data packets buffered in the handoff buffer
to the new AP that transmitted the INC-ACK message (S460). See generally
Spec. [0037]; Figs. 3 and 4.
Claim 1, reproduced below, is representative of the subject matter on
appeal:
1. A short-range wireless communication system, comprising:
a host controller interface provided with a handoff buffer for buffering
at least one of Host Controller Interface (HCI) data and transmission data,
and for exchanging said at least one of HCI data and transmission data with
an external device;
a microcontroller for forwarding to a new Access Point (AP) said at
least one of HCI data and transmission data buffered in the handoff buffer if
a message indicating setup completion of a connection with the external
device is transmitted from the new AP after a handoff occurs as the external
device moves, in a state where the new AP is interlinked with the external
device.
2
Appeal 2009-0011343
Application 10/748,168

THE REJECTION
The Examiner relies upon the following as evidence of unpatentability:
Martini US 6,675,015 B1 Jan. 6, 2004
(filed Sep. 15, 1999)

Mitts US 5,940,371 Aug. 17, 1999

The following rejection is before us for review:
The Examiner rejected claims 1-16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Martini in view of Mitts.

ISSUE
The pivotal issue is whether Mitts teaches the limitation of
“forwarding to a new Access Point (AP) said at least one of HCI data and
transmission data buffered in the handoff buffer if a message indicating
setup completion of a connection with the external device is transmitted
from the new AP after a handoff occurs as the external device moves” as
recited in independent claim 1 or similar limitations of independent claims 5,
9, and 13.

PRINCIPLES OF LAW
To establish prima facie obviousness of a claimed invention, all the
claim limitations must be taught or suggested by the prior art. See In re
Royka, 490 F.2d 981, 985 (CCPA 1974).

3
Appeal 2009-0011343
Application 10/748,168
ANALYSIS
Appellants argue (App. Br. 12), inter alia, that Mitts recitation to
“signaling data on the handover that indicate the new base station” (col. 8, ll.
25-30) does not equate to a signal indicating setup completion of a
connection, but rather, a signal that indicates the new base station.
Furthermore, Appellants assert (App. Br. 12) that there is no suggestion that
the signal is transmitted from the new AP.
We agree with Appellants (App. Br. 12) that Mitts’ reference to
“signaling data on the handover that indicate the new base station” (col. 8, ll.
25-30) is silent as to the new AP being the transmitter of the message
regarding the setup completion as recited in all of the independent claims.
We further agree with Appellants (Reply Br. 7) that the Examiner’s reliance
on Mitts’s background section (col. 2, ll. 26-52) for the new base station
BSq transmitting the complete message 27 indicating completion of the
handover as not curing the previously cited deficiency. This is because
Mitts’ background section (col. 2, ll. 26-52) also recites that the buffer data
25 are uploaded prior to transmission of the complete message 27 which is
contrary to the conditional claimed language requiring forwarding the
buffered HCI data if the new AP sends the message indicating setup
completion of a connection with the external device. In other words, the
claim language requires that the buffered data are sent after the message
indicating setup completion of a connection is transmitted from the new AP
base—not before as taught by Mitts’s background section.
For the foregoing reasons, we will reverse the Examiner’s rejection of
claims 1, 5, 9, and 13 and of the dependent claims 1-4, 6-8, 10-12, and 14-
16.

4
Appeal 2009-0011343
Application 10/748,168
CONCLUSION
The Examiner erred in finding that Mitts teaches the limitation of
“forwarding to a new Access Point (AP) said at least one of HCI data and
transmission data buffered in the handoff buffer if a message indicating
setup completion of a connection with the external device is transmitted
from the new AP after a handoff occurs as the external device moves.”

ORDER
The decision of the Examiner to reject claims 1-16 is reversed.

5
Appeal 2009-0011343
Application 10/748,168
REVERSED

ELD

SUGHRUE MION, PLLC
2100 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, N.W.
SUITE 800
WASHINGTON, DC 20037

6