Appeal 2007-0519
Application 10/723,324
D. ANALYSIS
The issue is whether Christiano describes the claimed validation component.
We find that it does.
Christiano describes a system comprising a verification component for
checking whether a stored license has been tampered with and to take action if that
is the case. FF 4 and 5. Christiano’s system ensures the proper license is stored by
first checking a key. Christiano checks a key associated with the license to
determine whether the stored license has been tampered with. While it is true, as
Appellants argue (Br. 6), that Christiano checks the key rather than the license data
itself; nevertheless, Christiano is checking the license data to determine if it has
been tampered with, albeit indirectly. The claimed validation component likewise
checks stored data. However, the claim does not say how that checking is
performed. Therefore, checking stored data using a key is not precluded by the
claim and the claim therefore encompasses the indirect technique Christiano
describes.
Appellants also argue that Christiano, unlike the claimed validation
component, does not check to see if the stored data is “corrupted.” Br. 6, ll. 11-19.
While it is true that Christiano does not use the term “corrupted” to describe the
condition of the stored license being checked, that is nevertheless what Christiano
is doing when it checks to see if the record has been “tampered with.” The
Specification does not give the term “corrupted,” as it is used in the claim, a
meaning that is different from its ordinary and customary meaning. FF 6. To one of
ordinary skill in the art, a “corrupted” record is a record that has been altered, and
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013