Ex Parte Lankford

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Jul 25, 2011

10663598 (B.P.A.I. Jul. 25, 2011)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
________________

Ex parte GERALD WINTON LANKFORD
________________

Appeal 2009-007949
Application 10/663,598
Technology Center 2600
________________

Before DAVID M. KOHUT, JASON V. MORGAN, and
BRUCE R. WINSOR, Administrative Patent Judges.

MORGAN, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
Appeal 2009-007949
Application 10/663,598

2

STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Introduction
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s final
rejection of claims 1-7, 9-11, and 13-20. We have jurisdiction under 35
U.S.C. § 6(b).
Exemplary Claim
1. Apparatus for a radio communication system
having a packet data network and multiple network
portions, each of said network portions being connected
to said packet data network by way of a respective
gateway, said apparatus comprising:
a detector adapted to receive values of positional
information associated with mobile nodes during
operation thereof to communicate by way of said packet
data network coupled by way of said respective gateway
to each of said respective network portions in whose
coverage areas that the mobile nodes, respectively, are
positioned, said detector configured to form indications
of the values of the positional information;
an associator adapted to receive the indications
formed by said detector of the values of the positional
information, said associator configured to associate
positioning of each of the mobile nodes with a
corresponding respective network portion, through which
communications are effectuated, thereby to identify
roaming relationships between each of the mobile nodes
and the corresponding network portions when the mobile
nodes are roaming; and
a storage element coupled to said associator, said
storage element configured to store values representative
of associations formed by said associator, the values
together forming a roaming network table indicating the
roaming relationships, the values forming entries, the
Appeal 2009-007949
Application 10/663,598

3
mobile nodes identified in terms of their respective home
network portions and individual ones of the entries given
less weight than other entries, without being detected,
when aged beyond a selected age, the roaming network
table accessible to identify the roaming relationships
identified therein, usable subsequently to determine
roaming capabilities of selected coverage areas of
selected network portions.
(App. Br. A-1; Claims App’x).
Rejections and Appellant’s Contentions
Appellant contends that the Examiner erred in rejecting claims 1-7
and 9-11 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sanchez
Ferreras (US 20050118998 A1), Aerrabotu (US 20040190522 A1) and
Takubo (US 6,597,909 B1) (App. Br. 5-7).1
ISSUES
Appellant’s arguments, as presented in the Appeal Brief, raise the
following issues:
1. Did the Examiner err in finding that the combination of Sanchez
Ferreras, Aerrabotu, and Takubo teaches or suggests giving individual
entries less weight than other entries, without being deleted, when aged
beyond a selected age?
2. Did the Examiner err in finding that the combination of Sanchez
Ferreras, Aerrabotu, and Takubo teaches or suggest communicating
positional information associated with mobile nodes by way of a packet data
network coupled by way of gateways to network portions?

1 Appellant’s contentions with respect to the rejection of claims 13-20, also
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sanchez
Ferreras, Aerrabotu, and Takubo, are substantially similar.
Appeal 2009-007949
Application 10/663,598

4
ANALYSIS
We have reviewed the Examiner’s rejections in light of Appellant’s
arguments (Appeal Brief) that the Examiner has erred.
We disagree with Appellant’s conclusions. We adopt as our own (1)
the findings and reasons set forth by the Examiner in the action from which
this appeal is taken and (2) the reasons set forth by the Examiner in the
Examiner’s Answer in response to Appellant’s Appeal Brief. We concur
with the conclusions reached by the Examiner.
(1) Whether the Examiner erred in finding that the combination of Sanchez
Ferreras, Aerrabotu, and Takubo teaches or suggests giving individual
entries less weight than other entries, without being deleted, when aged
beyond a selected age
We are not persuaded by Appellant’s arguments that Takubo fails to
give individual entries less weight than other entries, without being deleted,
and that Takubo uses relative ages and not a selected age. Appellant does not
persuasively show any patentable distinction between giving an entry a
lower priority and giving an entry less weight. Appellant also does not direct
us to evidence that persuasively shows that a “selected age” must be
absolute, as opposed to being an age selected from among those ages
associated with the entries.
Takubo teaches prioritizing a priority table by a subscriber date, with
the most recently accessed subscriber ranked higher than less recently
accessed subscribers (col. 7, ll. 26-40; col. 7, l. 61-col. 8, l. 3; figs.12A-
13C). Given that Takubo depicts entries being given lower priority (less
weight) by rearranging their positions within the priority table, as opposed to
deleting them from the priority table, we agree with the Examiner that
Appeal 2009-007949
Application 10/663,598

5
Takubo depicts giving individual entries less weight than other entries,
without being deleted.
Takubo shows that when a subscriber is accessed, entries having an
older access date than the subscriber’s access date are given a lower priority
(col. 8, ll. 6-9; figs.13A-B). That is, in Takubo the subscriber’s access date is
selected as the date that is used to provide lower priority to older entries. We
find that this teaches or suggests the “selected age” recitation.
Accordingly, we are not persuaded of error with respect to this issue
in the Examiner’s rejections of claims 1-7, 9-11, and 13-20.
(2) Whether the Examiner erred in finding that the combination of Sanchez
Ferreras, Aerrabotu, and Takubo teaches or suggest communicating
positional information associated with mobile nodes by way of a packet data
network coupled by way of gateways to network portions?
We are not persuaded by Appellant’s argument that Aerrabotu does
not teach or suggest a packet data network and gateway through which a
detector receives positional information of a mobile node. Appellant’s
conclusory statements fail to persuasively show error in the Examiner’s
reliance on Aerrabotu’s disclosure of Emergency Packet Data Network,
Server GPRS Service Node, and Gateway GPRS Service Node, when
combined with Sanchez Ferreras and Takubo, as teaching or suggesting
these limitations (Ans. 6, 13).
We are also not persuaded by Appellant’s argument that it would be
improper to combine Aerrabotu with Sanchez Ferreras (and Takubo). The
Examiner’s findings show that packet data networks connected to multiple
network portions by respective gateways were known in the art (Ans. 6, 13).
Appellant’s arguments fail to show that modifying the combined teachings
of Sanchez Ferreras and Takubo to work with such networks would have
Appeal 2009-007949
Application 10/663,598

6
been anything more than the use of familiar elements according to known
methods to yield a predictable result. See KSR Intern. Co. v. Teleflex, Inc.,
550 US 398, 401 (2007).
Accordingly, we are not persuaded of error with respect to this issue
in the Examiner’s rejections of claims 1-7, 9-11, and 13-20.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Based on the findings of facts and analysis above, we conclude that
claims 1-7, 9-11, and 13-20 are unpatentable because the Examiner did not
err in finding and concluding that:
1. the combination of Sanchez Ferreras, Aerrabotu, and Takubo
teaches or suggests giving individual entries less weight than other entries,
without being deleted, when aged beyond a selected age and
2. the combination of Sanchez Ferreras, Aerrabotu, and Takubo
teaches or suggest communicating positional information associated with
mobile nodes by way of a packet data network coupled by way of gateways
to network portions.
DECISION
We affirm the Examiner’s decisions rejecting claims 1-7, 9-11, and
13-20.
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).

AFFIRMED

Appeal 2009-007949
Application 10/663,598

7
tj