Ex Parte UPADRASTA - Page 8




          Appeal No. 2002-1513                                                        
          Application No. 08/829,587                                                  


          no teaching in Hluchyj that packet loss is monitored in his                 
          invention.                                                                  
          Claim 8                                                                     
          We will not sustain the rejection of claim 8.  The examiner                 
          relies on the text of Hluchyj at column 7, lines 35-57, for a               
          teaching of a user initiating the step of routing independent of            
          a determination of quality of service.  There is simply no such             
          teaching in the above text.                                                 
                                Claims 10, 15 and 16                                  
          We will not sustain the rejection of these claims.  Claim 10                
          requires Real Time Protocol (RTP) or Q.931, claim 15 requires               
          Real Time Control Protocol, and claim 16 requires Transmission              
          Control Protocol.  There is no specific teaching of any of these            
          protocols in Hluchyj.                                                       
          Summary                                                                     
          The rejection of claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 9, 13, 14, 17, 18 and 19                
          is sustained.  The rejection of claims 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 15 and 16           
          is reversed.                                                                







                                         -8–                                          





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007