Ex Parte Kregel

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Nov 28, 2011

12099930 (B.P.A.I. Nov. 28, 2011)

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.
12/099,930 04/09/2008 Alan L. Kregel 27592-00006-US3 5123
30678 7590 11/28/2011
CONNOLLY BOVE LODGE & HUTZ LLP
1875 EYE STREET, N.W.
SUITE 1100
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
EXAMINER
CUMMING, WILLIAM D
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2617
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
11/28/2011 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 ALAN L. KREGEL
____________

Appeal 2012-001039
Application 12/099,930
Technology Center 2600
____________

Before MAHSHID D. SAADAT, KRISTEN L. DROESCH and
BRUCE R. WINSOR, Administrative Patent Judges.

DROESCH, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appeal 2012-001039
Application 12/099,930

2
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellant seeks review under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) of a final rejection
of claims 45-52.
1
We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We
REVERSE.
BACKGROUND
The invention relates to a system for providing a message notification
to a cellular telephone customer regarding missed incoming calls. Col. 1, ll.
11-15, 55-65; Abs.
2

Claim 45 is illustrative and is reproduced below (disputed limitations
in italics):
45. An apparatus to provide missed call notification to a
mobile communication device, comprising a control signaling
facility configured to:
receive call setup information regarding a call to said
mobile communication device;
send an inquiry to a facility for maintaining status of said
mobile communication device;
receive a response to said inquiry indicating that said
mobile communication device cannot receive communications;
and,
in response to receiving said response, provide a
message containing information identifying the origin of said
call to a message forwarding facility for subsequent forwarding
to said mobile communication device when said mobile
communication device is able to receive the message.

The Examiner rejected claims 45, 47, 48 and 50-52 under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Valentine (U.S. Patent No.
5,884,170).

1
Claims 1-44 were cancelled.
2
Reference is made to the original patent (US 6,799,017).
Appeal 2012-001039
Application 12/099,930

3
The Examiner rejected claims 46 and 49 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Valentine and Bhagat (U.S. Patent No. 5,414,750).
ISSUE
Did the Examiner err in finding that Valentine describes a control
signaling facility configured to receive a response to an inquiry indicating
that the mobile communication device cannot receive communications and
provide a message containing information identifying the origin of the call to
a message forwarding facility in response to receiving the response to the
inquiry?
FINDINGS OF FACT
Valentine
1. Valentine describes, referring to Figure 1 below [numbers from Figure 1
inserted], a communication network that includes a mobile station [10]
which communicates with a satellite [12] over communications line [14].
Col. 4, ll. 9-16; col. 6, ll. 41-44.
Valentine’s Figure 1 is reproduced below:

Figure 1 depicts block diagram of a cellular communications network
Appeal 2012-001039
Application 12/099,930

4
2. The satellite [12] is operable to transmit pages to a plurality of mobile
stations [10] for the purpose of establishing a traffic channel to connect a
call to the specified mobile station [10]. Col. 4, ll. 17-22.
3. The satellite [12] receives signals from a transceiver [20] which were
originated by mobile switching center visitor location register (MSC/VLR)
[18] indicating that an incoming call for connection with mobile station [10]
is received by MSC/VLR [18]. Col. 4, ll. 27-33.
4. If an incoming call is received by the MSC/VLR [18] on line [16], the
MSC/VLR [18] processes the incoming call, and transmits the incoming call
request to the transmitter/receiver [20] over line [22], the transmitter [20]
transmits a signal to satellite [12] over communication link [24] and the
satellite [12] in turn pages the mobile station [10] so that a traffic channel
can be established over communication link [14]. Col. 5, ll. 6-15; 23-29; see
Fig. 3, steps 100-102; col. 8, ll. 42-50.
5. The page attempt also delivers the identity of the calling party to mobile
station [10] for notification purposes and for later use. Col. 5, ll. 29-31.
6. If the mobile station [10] responds to the page request with an
acknowledgement which is received by the satellite [12], the satellite [12]
transmits a signal over communication link [24] to transmitter/receiver [20]
reflecting that communication with mobile station [10] was successfully
established and the transmitter [20] in turn transmits a signal to MSC/VLR
[18] over line [22] reflecting that a communication link [14] was established
with mobile station [10]. Col. 5, ll. 15-22; see Fig. 3, step 103; col. 8, ll. 48-
50.
7. If MSC/VLR [18] does not receive a signal on line [22] from
transmitter/receiver [20] indicating that the satellite [12] received an
Appeal 2012-001039
Application 12/099,930

5
acknowledgement from mobile station [10], MSC/VLR [18] will analyze
whether the mobile station [10] subscribes to high penetration mode
transmissions. Col. 5, ll. 33-39; see Fig. 3, steps 103, 104; col. 8, ll. 50-54.
8. If the mobile station [10] is a high penetration mode subscriber, belongs
to a class of mobile stations which is designated to receive high penetration
mode transmissions, or is within a geographic area to which high penetration
mode transmissions are to be made (Fig. 3, steps 103, 104, 109, 110), the
page request is retransmitted at a first high power level (Fig. 3, step 106).
Col. 8, l. 50-col. 9, l. 2.
9. After retransmitting the page at the first increased power level (Fig. 3,
step 106), the system determines whether an acknowledgement signal was
received from the recipient mobile station [10] (Fig. 3, step 107) and if an
acknowledgment signal is not received the communication network
determines whether the mobile station [10] subscribes to multiple
transmissions at the same level or a second high penetration mode power
level (Fig. 3, step 115). Col. 9, ll. 7-10, 21-26.
10. If the mobile station [10] subscribes to multiple transmissions at the
same level or a second high penetration mode power level, then a
transmission is initiated to transmit the page request at a second higher
transmission level (Fig 3, step 116). Col. 9, ll. 30-34.
11. The steps of transmitting at a first power level and a subsequent second
power level (Fig. 3, steps 106, 116) include transmitting identifying
information, such calling party number in the page transmission so the
mobile station may receive such information even when it cannot respond at
a power level detectable by the satellite. Col. 9, ll. 39-46.

Appeal 2012-001039
Application 12/099,930

6
ANALYSIS
We have reviewed the Examiner’s rejection in light of Appellant’s
arguments in the Appeal Brief presented in response to the Final Office
Action (“FOA”) and the arguments in the Reply Brief presented in response
to the Examiner’s Answer.
Independent claim 45 recites: “a control signaling facility configured
to . . . send an inquiry . . . receive a response to said inquiry indicating that
said mobile communication device cannot receive communications; and in
response to receiving said response, provide a message containing
information identifying the origin of said call to a message forwarding
facility . . . .” Independent claim 48 recites substantially similar limitations.
The Examiner directs attention to Valentine’s description at column 1,
lines 33-41; column 8, lines 42-58 and Figure 3, steps 103, 107, 117 and
finds that Valentine describes receiving a response to the inquiry indicating
that the mobile communication device cannot receive communications. Ans.
7. The Examiner further directs attention to steps 106, 116 and 109 depicted
in the flow diagram of Figure 3 and further finds that Valentine describes in
response to receiving the response, providing a message containing
identifying information of the call origin to a message forwarding facility.
Ans. 7.
Appellant argues that Valentine does not teach or suggest “in response
to receiving said response [to said inquiry indicating that said mobile
communication device cannot receive communications], provide a message
containing information identifying the origin of said call to a message
forwarding facility”. App. Br. 12; Reply Br. 5-7. Appellant explains that
Valentine teaches transmitting identifying information such as a message
Appeal 2012-001039
Application 12/099,930

7
number or a calling party number in the page transmission during a
transmission at a first power level or second power level depicted at steps
106 or 116 of Figure 3, but notes that Valentine discloses that the mobile
station may receive the information even if it cannot respond at a power
level detectable by the satellite. App. Br. 12 (citing Valentine col. 9, ll. 40-
46).
We agree with Appellant that Valentine does not disclose providing a
message containing information identifying the origin of the call to a
message forwarding facility in response to receiving a response to the
inquiry indicating that the mobile communication device cannot receive
communications. Valentine describes that signal path interference can block
a signal and prevent it from reaching a specified receiver. See col. 1, ll. 33-
41. Valentine also describes that a mobile station can be paged (i.e., an
inquiry) and the mobile station can acknowledge the page (i.e., a response to
the inquiry). However, Valentine describes that the page attempts and page
transmissions include identification information such as a calling party
number and explains that that the mobile station can receive this information
even if it cannot respond with an acknowledgement signal at a level
detectable by the satellite. Col. 5, ll. 29-31; col. 9, ll. 39-46. Therefore,
Valentine describes transmitting the identification information (e.g., calling
party number) in the page transmission regardless of whether the mobile
station can or cannot receive the page transmission and regardless of
whether an acknowledgement signal has been received from the mobile
station indicating that the mobile station has received the page transmission.
The Examiner does not sufficiently explain how the relied-on portions of
Valentine describe providing a message or page transmission including the
Appeal 2012-001039
Application 12/099,930

8
identification information (e.g., calling party number) in response to
receiving a response indicating that the mobile station cannot receive
communications.
For all these reasons, we do not sustain the rejection of claims 45, 47,
48 and 50-52 as anticipated by Valentine. Claims 46 and 49 depend from
independent claims 45 and 48. As applied by the Examiner, Bhagat does not
remedy the deficiencies of Valentine. Ans. 10. For the same reasons as
claims 45, 47, 48 and 50-52 we do not sustain the rejection of claims 46 and
49 as obvious over Valentine and Bhagat.

DECISION
We REVERSE the rejection of claims 45, 47, 48 and 50-52 under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Valentine.
We REVERSE the rejection of claims 46 and 49 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Valentine and Bhagat.
REVERSED

ELD