Appeal No. 96-0067
Application 08/075,241
the first data structure. The examiner has not accounted for
this claim feature and the appellants have not conceded this
issue. In the appeal brief at page 5, the appellants argued that
there is no teaching or suggestion in Liang that a hierarchy was
involved with the organization of the workstation state list. We
also can find no such hierarchy with respect to the view
traversal control block. In column 4, lines 56-57, Liang simply
states that the "[view] traversal control block contains a list
of view masks." The failure to account for this feature
constitutes reversible error.
The examiner acknowledged (answer at 3) that Liang does not
disclose "said first data structure being mapped to a node of
said second data structure." However, the examiner simply
concluded (answer at 3) that it would have been obvious to one
with ordinary skill in the art to map the first data structure to
the second data structure "because this allowed for manipulations
of the descriptions stored in the first data structure." We
reject the examiner's view, since a data structure can be
directly manipulated without the nodes thereof being mapped to
another data structure. The examiner also has pointed to no
evidence that mapping between the nodes of data structures was a
commonly recognized way to achieve data manipulation.
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007