Ex Parte Mochizuki

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Feb 28, 2013

10515726 (P.T.A.B. Feb. 28, 2013)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
____________

Ex parte TAKUJI MOCHIZUKI
____________

Appeal 2010-008819
Application 10/515,726
Technology Center 2600
____________

Before MAHSHID D. SAADAT, LYNNE E. PETTIGREW,
and GEORGIANNA W. BRADEN, Administrative Patent Judges.

PER CURIAM.

DECISION ON APPEAL

Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Final Rejection
of claims 1-7, 12-17, and 21, which constitute all the claims pending in this
application as claims 8-11 and 18-20 have been canceled. We have
jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We affirm.
Appeal 2010-008819
Application 10/515,726

2
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Introduction
Appellant’s invention relates to suppressing adjacent channel
interference and reducing carrier sense error in a packet radio
communication system (see Spec. 8:2-8).
Independent claim 1 is exemplary of the claims under appeal and
reads as follows:
1. A receiver in a packet radio communication
system using the carrier sense multiple access method,
comprising:
a wideband filter receiving a received signal and
subjecting the received signal to wideband filtering, the
wideband filter having at least a one-channel modulation
occupied bandwidth;
a fixed nth-order narrowband filter connected to an
output of the wideband filter, to receive the wideband filtered
received signal and suppressing adjacent channel interference to
reduce carrier sense error in detecting a local carrier sense
energy level in the carrier sense multiple access method;
a received signal strength indicator connected to an
output of the narrowband filter for carrier sensing a preamble of
a received packet signal from a received narrowband filtered
received signal, the narrowband filter having less than the one-
channel modulation occupied bandwidth;
a carrier sense judgment device connected to an output of
the received signal strength indicator to receive an RSSI output;
and
a demodulator having an input connected to the output of
the wideband filter, to receive the wideband filtered received
signal for demodulation,
wherein when carrier sense is ON, the carrier sense
judgment device sends a demodulation start instruction to the
demodulator.
Appeal 2010-008819
Application 10/515,726

3
Rejection on Appeal
The Examiner rejected claims 1-7, 12-17, and 21 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Applicant’s Prior Art (“APA” depicted
in Figs. 2-4), Matsuki (US 5,630,219), and Whikehart (US 6,058,148). (See
Answer 3-18).
Appellant’s Contentions
With respect to claim 1, Appellant contends that the Examiner erred in
rejecting the claim because there is no motivation for combining APA with
Matsuki or Whikehart as Matsuki is directed to a system and configuration
different from that of APA which relates to a receiver in a packet radio
communication system (App. Br. 26-30). Similarly, Appellant argues that
Matsuki and Whikehart are directed to dissimilar systems and only teach
filtering in applications unrelated to the APA system (App. Br. 31-34).
Appellant argues the patentability of the remaining claims based on
the same reasons stated with respect to claim 1, allowing those claims to fall
with claim 1 (App. Br. 38-39).

ANALYSIS
We have reviewed the Examiner’s rejections in light of Appellant’s
contentions that the Examiner has erred. Further, we have reviewed the
Examiner’s detailed findings and responses to each of the arguments raised
by Appellant.
We disagree with Appellant’s conclusion. 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 rebuttals to arguments expressed by
the Examiner in the Examiner’s Answer in response to Appellant’s Appeal
Appeal 2010-008819
Application 10/515,726

4
Brief (see Ans. 18-23). We specifically agree with the Examiner (Ans. 21)
that Matsuki relates to removal of adjacent channel interference using an IF
narrowband filter 16 in a position prior to a RSSI detector (Ans. 21, citing
(Matsuki, Figs. 3 and 4a, col. 2, ll. 17-33)). As further explained by the
Examiner (id.), one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that
the configuration suggested by Matsuki remedies the adjacent channel
interference concern in APA.
Additionally, contrary to Appellant’s argument that Matsuki includes
no teaching toward the method of APA (Reply Br. 2-3), we agree with the
Examiner’s findings and conclusion (see Ans. 22) because the teaching
value of Matsuki is removal of adjacent channel interference using an IF
narrowband filter, whereas the remaining features of claim 1 are taught by
APA. We also observe that, based on the Examiner’s discussion of the
proposed modification (Ans. 21-22), the necessary adjustments to the filter
of Matsuki in order to suppress adjacent channel interference in APA are
within the knowledge possessed by one of ordinary skill in the art.
In that regard, the Supreme Court has indicated that:
[It is error to] assum[e] that a person of ordinary skill
attempting to solve a problem will be led only to those elements
of prior art designed to solve the same problem . . . . Common
sense teaches [. . .] that familiar items may have obvious uses
beyond their primary purposes, and in many cases a person of
ordinary skill will be able to fit the teachings of multiple patents
together like pieces of a puzzle.
KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 420 (2007) (citation
omitted).

Appeal 2010-008819
Application 10/515,726

5
CONCLUSIONS
1. The Examiner has not erred in rejecting 1-7, 12-17, and 21
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over APA, Matsuki, and
Whikehart.
2. Claims 1-7, 12-17, and 21 are not patentable.

DECISION
The Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1-7, 12-17, and 21 is
affirmed.
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

tj