Appeal No. 96-0974
Application 08/024,299
applicant is suggesting that, as claimed, the
test is performed during a "power-on period,"
this makes more sense than a power-on mode, as
argued. Kohno still meets this limitation.
[Our emphasis.]
The Answer does not explain how Kohno meets this limitation.
The final Office action explains:
Kohno specifically discloses identifying
abnormal lines included in a plurality of
transmission lines. He does not specifically
mention performing this check during power on[;]
however, the system disclosed by Kohno gives no
particular time period within which this check
takes place. No particular weight can be given
to the fact that applicant performs his check at
power on. It would make sense that any check
for circuit abnormalities would be scheduled
prior to any normal operations.
As noted above, this type of reasoning is inappropriate in a
rejection for anticipation, which requires that the reference
expressly or inherently disclose every limitation of the
claim.
Appellants also correctly note that the examiner failed
to address the last two elements of claim 1, i.e., the "means
for again checking the presence of a defect in other lines of
the cable after switching said defective line to said another
line" and the "means for automatically resuming transmission
of data upon completion of the checking." It is not apparent
- 7 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007