Appeal No. 95-3919
Application No. 07/907,934
status report and unit ID signal 64 is sent together with the
signal 63 to the terminal 10 (column 5, lines 17 through 24).
Thereafter, a refresh registers command 70 is issued by
terminal 10 to reset registers 23, 27 and 28 in terminal 11 to
zero (column 5, lines 36 through 40).
Turning first to claim 111, appellant argues that
Katznelson neither teaches nor would have suggested
“generating datagrams at regular time intervals from at least
one licensee’s site” (Brief, page 6), “sending said datagrams
including said address from said licensee’s site over said
communications facility to a licensor’s site at regular time
intervals while said licensed product is in use” (Brief, page
14), and “counting said datagrams from each licensee, using
said license control system, as an indication of the use by
the licensee of said licensed product” (Brief, page 15). We
agree. The obviousness rejection of claims 111 and 112 is
reversed.
Claim 113 includes the limitation of sending a request
datagram to the licensor’s site while the licensed product is
in use. As indicated supra, Katznelson neither teaches nor
would have suggested to the skilled artisan such transmission
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007