Appeal No. 1997-1194
Application No. 08/084,668
message, converts the called party number and retrieves the
least cost routing data to select a particular ISDN trunk
circuit.
With regard to Shinohara’s use of “virtual” circuits, we
agree with the Examiner that the disclosure at column 6, line
31 to column 9, line 22 of Shinohara describes a plurality of
virtual circuits and selection means as claimed even though
the term “virtual” is not mentioned by Shinohara. We note
that Appellant’s specification at page 4, line 13 defines a
virtual circuit as follows:
Virtual circuits are circuits which represent
routes which are not always connected.
In our view, the disclosure of Shinohara which describes the
assigning of various circuits to routers with the selected
circuits using telephone connections for packet transmission
would clearly meet the above definition.
In view of the above discussion, it is our opinion that
the Examiner’s prima facie case of obviousness remains
unrebutted by any convincing arguments offered by Appellant
and, accordingly, the obviousness rejection of independent
claims 1, 6, and 13 is sustained. The rejection of dependent
10
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007