Appeal No. 95-3919
Application No. 07/907,934
The obviousness rejection of claim 137 is reversed
because terminal 11 in Katznelson does not transmit requests
“at predetermined time intervals.”
The obviousness rejection of claim 138 is sustained
because the unit ID in Katznelson is a unique identification
code that must be in requests and replies for authorization to
gain access to data on the CD-ROM.
The obviousness rejection of claims 139 and 140 is
sustained because appellant has grouped these claims with
claim 132 (Brief, page 3).
The obviousness rejection of claims 141 and 142 is
reversed because Katznelson does not consider a license
expiration date of a product on the CD-ROM.
The obviousness rejection of claims 143 and 144 is
sustained because appellant has grouped these claims with
claim 132 (Brief, page 3).
The obviousness rejection of claims 145 and 146 is
reversed because Katznelson does not deny use of a product “if
more than a predetermined number of processes” at terminal 11
are using a licensed product from the CD-ROM.
10
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007