Ex Parte Dupuy

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Nov 5, 2010

10106252 (B.P.A.I. Nov. 5, 2010)

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.
10/106,252 03/27/2002 Pierre Dupuy Q69232 6257
7590 11/08/2010
SUGHRUE MION, PLLC
Suite 800
2100 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20037-3213
EXAMINER
ROBERTS, BRIAN S
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2466
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
11/08/2010 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 PIERRE DUPUY
____________

Appeal 2009-006810
Application 10/106,252
Technology Center 2400
____________

Before JOHN C. MARTIN, JOSEPH F. RUGGIERO, and
CARLA M. KRIVAK, Administrative Patent Judges.

KRIVAK, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL1
Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from a final rejection of
claims 1-5. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We affirm.

1 The two-month time period for filing an appeal or commencing a civil
action, as recited in 37 C.F.R. § 1.304, or for filing a request for rehearing,
as recited in 37 C.F.R. § 41.52, begins to run from the “MAIL DATE”
(paper delivery mode) or the “NOTIFICATION DATE” (electronic delivery
mode) shown on the PTOL-90A cover letter attached to this decision.

Appeal 2009-006810
Application 10/106,252

2
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Independent claim 1, reproduced below, is representative of the
subject matter on appeal.
1. A synchronized bidirectional packet transmission method
between a base transceiver station of a radio-communication
network and a transcoder unit forming part of a fixed telephone
network and connected to said base transceiver station, to
transmit voice or sound information or data, the method
comprising:

transmitting data packets from the base transceiver station to
the transcoder unit according to an uplink priority order for
time slots of a frame; and

transmitting data packets from the transcoder unit to the base
transceiver station according to a downlink priority order for
time slots of a frame which is reverse to the uplink priority
order.

The Examiner rejected claims 1-5 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph.
Appellant contends the claims meet the requirements of § 112, second
paragraph (App. Br. 10-12). The Examiner mentions for the first time in the
Answer an inconsistency between the claims and Appellant’s Specification
regarding the meaning of “uplink” and “downlink” (Ans. 4). Appellant had
the opportunity to address this alleged inconsistency and point to error in the
Examiner’s position by filing a Reply Brief, but failed to do so. Thus, the
rejection of claims 1-5 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph is
sustained.

Appeal 2009-006810
Application 10/106,252

3
DECISION
The Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1-5 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)(v).

AFFIRMED

KIS

SUGHRUE MION, PLLC
Suite 800
2100 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20037-3213