Appeal No. 2006-2011
Application No. 09/996,720
even if the data in Bruce does not have to be corrected, the value of zero (the number
of times that data was corrected by the memory card) is not recorded in an area of the
memory card as claimed.
With respect to the rejection of claim 14 based on Shimizu, the examiner has
presented findings in support of anticipation [answer, pages 6-7]. Appellants argue that
Shimizu fails to disclose a computer readable storage containing at least one event
descriptor about the usage of the memory card. Appellants argue that the information
stored in Shimizu cannot reasonably be interpreted as relating to the usage of a
memory card. Appellants argue that the examiner’s interpretation of “usage of the
memory card” is not consistent with the plain language of the claims, the specification,
or the file history of this case [brief, pages 7-10]. The examiner responds that the
information stored on the memory card of Shimizu relates to how that memory card has
been and will be used, which constitutes usage of the memory card. The examiner
disagrees with the contention that his interpretation is inconsistent with the plain
language of the claims, the specification, or the file history [answer, pages 29-31].
Appellants respond that their specification draws a distinction between information
about the usage of a memory card and information that is merely stored on a memory
card [reply brief, pages 1-2].
We will not sustain the examiner’s rejection of claim 14 based on Shimizu. We
agree with appellants that the types of information recorded in Shimizu cannot
reasonably be interpreted as event descriptors about usage of the memory card as
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007