Ex parte JOHNSON et al. - Page 3




          Appeal No. 96-0651                                                          
          Application No. 08/087,164                                                  


               the local host computer executing software to communicate              
          with the remote computer through the modem connected to the                 
          telephone line and operable for initiating a telephone call to              
          the remote computer in response to the commands by a local                  
          user of the local host computer and for controlling                         
          downloading of the updated operating code from the remote                   
          computer to the local host computer; and                                    
               the local host computer further executing software to                  
          communicate with the modem through the communications                       
          interface, to place the updated operating code into updated                 
          operating code packets and to control transfer of said updated              
          operating code packets from the local host computer to the                  
          modem over the communications interface.                                    

               The examiner relies on the following references:                       
          Seibert et al. (Seibert)           5,239,652                Aug.            
          24, 1993                                                                    
          Herh et al. (Herh)            5,268,928                Dec.  7,             
          1993                                                                        

               Claims 1 through 4, 6 and 10 through 12 stand rejected                 
          under 35 U.S.C. 103.  As evidence of obviousness, the examiner              
          cites Herh with regard to claims 1, 2, 4, 10 and 11, adding                 
          Seibert with regard to claims 3, 6 and 12.                                  
               Reference is made to the brief and answer for the                      
          respective positions of appellants and the examiner.                        


                                       OPINION                                        
               We reverse.                                                            
                                          3                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007