Appeal No. 2001-0051
Application No. 08/414,240
The examiner relies on the following references:
Moeller et al. (Moeller) 5,473,777 Dec. 5, 1995
(filed Jul. 19, 1993)
Waldo et al. (Waldo) 5,475,817 Dec. 12, 1995
(effectively filed Feb. 25, 1991)
Danforth 5,493,680 Feb. 20, 1996
(effectively filed Jul. 6, 1992)
Jeffrey M. Richter (Richter), Windows 3.1: A Developer’s Guide, 2nd Edition, Ch. 2,
Subclassing and Superclassing Windows, pp. 63-123, M & T Books (1992).
The Common Object Request Broker: Architecture and Specification (CORBA) Rev.
1.1, Ch. 3, The Common Object Request Broker Architecture, pp. 27-44, Ch. 9, The
Basic Object Adapter, pp. 147-170, Object Management Group, Inc. (Dec. 1991).
Claims 1-16 and 19-43 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over CORBA, Moeller, Danforth, and Richter.
Claims 17 and 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over CORBA, Moeller, Danforth, Richter, and Waldo.
We refer to the Final Rejection (mailed Jul. 6, 1999), the Examiner’s Answer
(mailed Mar. 28, 2000), and the Supplemental Examiner’s Answer (mailed Jun. 18,
2002) for a statement of the examiner’s position and to the Brief (filed Dec. 21, 1999),
the Reply Brief (filed Jun. 5, 2000), and the Supplemental Reply Brief (filed Aug. 26,
2002) for appellants’ position with respect to the claims which stand rejected.
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007