Appeal No. 95-5030
Application 07/815,694
processed, in our view the claim feature of incrementing the
information indicating the order of receipt is satisfied.
The discussion in the supplemental examiner's answer on page
3 about connectionless packet switched networks in general is not
supported by citation to any specific prior art reference. Also,
the stated ground of rejection is anticipation over the single
reference Sakon, not any prior art pertaining to connectionless
packet switched networks. The appellants petitioned to have that
portion of the supplemental answer excised and the petition was
denied on the ground that it did not serve as the basis of any
ground of rejection. In our view, such assertions by the
examiner without proper citation and inclusion in the ground of
rejection is improper and has no place in this appeal.
The appellants argue (Reply at 3) that Sakon does not
disclose sending a signal from a first device coupled to a source
of data to a second device which receives data from said first
device, which signal indicates that data is ready for transfer to
the second device. The appellants further state (Reply at 4)
that because Sakon performs its own examination to determine the
presence or absence of incoming data, there is no reason for
Sakon to send a data transfer ready signal and it would not be
inherent in Sakon's device to send a data transfer ready signal.
15
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007