Appeal 2007-0719
Application 09/731,205
ISSUES
The pivotal issue in the appeal before us are as follows:
Have Appellants shown that the Examiner failed to establish that one
of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the present invention, would
have found that the combination of Sorkin and Irie renders the claimed
invention unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)?
FINDINGS OF FACT
The following findings of fact are supported by a preponderance of the
evidence.
The invention
1. Appellants invented a network document system (10) having a
marking system (12) and a Digital Front End (DFE) controller (16) allegedly
arranged in parallel with the iNIC (20) to facilitate independent
communication with the marking engine 12. (Specification 3 and Figure 1.)3
2. The iNIC (20) segregates data received from the network (10) into
control data and job a data. (Specification 6.)
3. The control data includes object-oriented rendering data including text,
pictures, business graphics for enhancing document processing operations
and page description language data about a document to be made. (Id 7.)
4. The iNIC (20) routes received control data directly to the marking
engine (12) while independently forwarding received job data to the marking
engine (12) via the DFE controller (16). (Id.)
3 We note that figure 1 of the drawings does not accurately depict that the
DFE controller (16) and the Marking system (12) are arranged in parallel
with the iNIC (20). We leave to the Examiner to consider objecting to the
drawings in any further prosecution of this application.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013