Appeal No. 96-3238
Application No. 08/137,590
number of retries have been attempted (col. 6, lines 4-20). No
means is disclosed for identifying a failed terminal.
Roberts discloses a system for transmitting television usage
data to a remote computer over telephone lines. The only part of
this reference that the examiner cites in the rejection is
col. 13, line 60 et seq. (i.e., claim 1), which he states
"teaches a remote data monitoring apparatus that isolates a
device if a response is not received within a given period"
(final Office action at 4). The motivation for combining the
teachings of Bennett and Roberts is said to be that there "would
have been a desire to terminate a connection as soon as a device
fails to respond within a given reporting period. Moreover, the
use of time-out counters is well known." Id.
As with the first ground of rejection, assuming for the sake
of argument that the artisan would have been motivated to combine
the teachings of Bennett and Roberts, we agree with appellants
that the combined teachings would not satisfy the claims, i.e.,
they would not result in a remote management apparatus that
identifies a failed terminal device by determining that the
period of time during which the remote management apparatus
continuously has been available to receive a communication from
the terminal device exceeds the retry period of the terminal
- 7 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007