Appeal No. 95-4187
Application 07/835,374
) BOARD OF
PATENT
) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
MICHAEL R. FLEMING )
Administrative Patent Judge )
THOMAS, Administrative Patent Judge, Concurring:
I fully concur in the reasoning, findings and
conclusions of my colleagues in affirming-in-part the
rejection of certain claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102. Even under
this section and certainly within the provisions of 35 U.S.C.
§ 103, I would add separately that the first column of page
492 of the reference to Tsuruta indicates that the "actor
models a scheduling expert, or his reasoning process, that is,
models dynamic knowledge or somewhat active acknowledge."
This teaching provides additional dimensions of understanding
from an artisan's perspective of the nature and types of
knowledge that may be applied against the broadly defined
element knowledge and harmonizing knowledge of the claims on
appeal.
Additionally, from my study of the disclosed and
claimed invention, I conclude that all pending claims 1 to 25
14
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007