Appeal 2006-2936
Application 10/013,714
making the data access permission setting for the program to access the
database when the program is installed in the service database. (Br. 14,
Reply Br. 8-9.) We agree with Appellants for the reasons set forth in our
discussion of claim 4 above from which claim 8 directly depends. We
therefore reverse this rejection.
Claims 6 and 18
Appellant contends that Britton does not anticipate claims 6 and 18
since it fails to teach the limitation of verifying the safety of the program
before making the data access permission setting for the program to access
the database by checking additional information recorded on the program.
(Br. 15.) We agree with Appellants for the reasons set forth in our
discussion of claims 4 and 16 above from which claims 6 and 18 directly
depend respectively. We therefore reverse this rejection.
Claims 7 and 19
Appellant contends that Britton does not anticipate claims 7 and 19
since it fails to teach the limitation of verifying the safety of the program
before making the data access permission setting for the program to access
the database by analyzing the code of the program. (Br. 16.) We agree with
Appellants for the reasons set forth in our discussion of claims 4 and 16
above from which claims 7 and 19 directly depend respectively. We
therefore reverse this rejection.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013