Appeal No. 95-2429
Application No. 07/916,770
hierarchy and label sequences for data structures of a dictionary
entry would not have been obvious over the teachings of Simonetti
because the components of a dictionary entry are not hierarchical
by nature [brief, page 4]. Appellants also argue that Simonetti
does not teach that some of the data segments collectively form a
word definition as recited in claim 1.
The examiner has responded that the hierarchy that exists
between streets, cities and states in Simonetti is just as
natural as the hierarchy between the letters in the English
alphabet and the alphabetical arrangement of words in a
dictionary. Additionally, the examiner argues that “the
hierarchy recited in the claims in question lacks adequate
structure to distinguish over the prior art” [answer, page 4].
The examiner also asserts that the collection of data segments to
form a word definition has not been given patentable weight
because the phrase is simply a functional recitation without
supporting structure.
We must first consider the examiner’s implicit position
that the recitation of specific data structures and labels cannot
be used to structurally distinguish one database search system
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007