Appeal No. 2002-1844
Application 08/975,428
lines 50-54 (FR10; EA9). The examiner finds that Hyodo does not
explicitly disclose mapping by transforming the data as part of
the data storage process, but finds that Hyodo receives data from
two sources and must transform the data to conform to the proper
storage format (FR10; EA10). The examiner takes Official Notice
that it was old and well known in the database arts that incoming
data must be transformed into the appropriate format before being
stored in a database (FR10; EA10) and concludes that "[o]ne [of
ordinary skill] would have been motivated to parse, categorize,
index, and map incoming data in order to allow more efficient
storage, search, and retrieval of data for the subsequent data
analysis in the Hyodo and Gerace systems" (FR11; EA11).
Appellants argue that Hyodo fails to teach the limitation of
a data warehouse because the logs of Hyodo are not databases, and
are not modifiable to be a data warehouse, and it is not clear
how Hyodo would have benefited from having a data warehouse
instead of an ordinary storage device (Br19).
The examiner notes that the term "data warehouse" is broadly
data storage, which is met by Hyodo (EA18-20 ¶ 11.e).
We agree with the examiner that "data warehouse" is a broad
term that does not define over data stored in the online access
log and the telephone service access log. While we could,
perhaps, limit the meaning of the term to the dictionary
definition provided by appellants (Exhibit C), it is not clear
- 12 -
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007