Appeal No. 2001-1087
Application 08/660,616
Turning to the anticipation rejection of claims 1, 2,
9, 10, 13 and 15, appellants argue (substitute brief, pages 9
and 10) that the functional metrics data, the composite index and
maintenance information set forth in the method steps in the
claims on appeal are not disclosed by Abdel-Hamid. We agree.
The Abdel-Hamid publication is concerned with software
estimation, software cost and makes use of constructive cost
modeling (Cocomo). The publication additionally discusses full-
time equivalents or person-months (page 23, column 1). However,
no other teachings relevant to the claims on appeal are found in
the Abdel-Hamid publication. Thus, the anticipation rejection of
claims 1, 2, 9, 10, 13 and 15 is reversed for lack of a prima
facie case.
The obviousness rejection of claims 4 through 6, 8
and 14 based upon the teachings of the Abdel-Hamid publication
is reversed for all of the reasons set forth supra in the
anticipation rejection.
The obviousness rejection of claims 17 and 18 is
reversed because the teachings of White fail to cure the noted
shortcomings in the teachings of the Abdel-Hamid publication.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007