Ex Parte Lewis - Page 6

                Appeal 2006-2696                                                                              
                Application 10/266,954                                                                        


                      The remainder of the independent claims recite similar limitations to                   
                those of claim 37 and claim 75, either within a “whereby” clause (claims 47,                  
                53, 57, 64, 67, and 71) or not (claims 73 and 74), none of which are shown                    
                to be disclosed or suggested by the applied prior art.                                        
                      The Examiner does, however, in the “Response to Argument” section                       
                of the Answer, assert that Pepe teaches a midware server representing                         
                subclients as a single client to an enterprise management system.  (Answer                    
                14-15.)  We agree with Appellant (Reply Br. 6-7) that the identified sections                 
                of Pepe, relating to message format conversion and delivery between various                   
                devices on wireline and wireless networks, fail to teach a midware server                     
                representing subclients as a single client to an enterprise management                        
                system.                                                                                       
                      Bravman as applied in combination against dependent claims 39, 65,                      
                and 66 does not remedy the basic deficiencies in the rejection over Pepe and                  
                Seitz.  Because the rejection fails to show disclosure or suggestion of all the               
                limitations of any independent claim on appeal, we do not sustain the                         
                § 103(a) rejection of claims 37-42, 44-61, and 63-75.                                         











                                                      6                                                       

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013