Appeal No. 95-1402
Application No. 07/936,507
operational data or that an “assessment” is carried out by the gateway entry station.
Therefore, this argument is not persuasive.
LAVIGNE IN VIEW OF REITER AND COPE
The examiner relies upon Cope to teach the validating of information. (See answer
at page 5.) The examiner has not relied upon Cope to teach any “reformatting the
collected operational data into a single format” as recited in claim 1. Furthermore, the
examiner has not identified any portion of Cope teaching or suggesting this feature, nor do
we find a clear teaching thereof in Cope.
LAVIGNE IN VIEW OF REITER, COPE AND BEASLEY
Similarly, Beasley does not teach or suggest the missing teaching as discussed
above.
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to the
appellants’ specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner. Upon evaluation of all
the evidence before us, it is our conclusion that the evidence adduced by the examiner is
not sufficient to establish a prima facie case of obviousness with respect to
claim 1. Accordingly, we will not sustain the examiner's rejection of independent claim 1
under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Similar limitations are found in claims 8 and 11. Therefore, we will
-9-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007