Appeal No. 96-3047
Application 08/053,191
We find, then, that the use of such a gateway router on a
mobile unit in Harrison obviously would have created a virtual
router each time the mobile unit moved from one network
configuration, one zone, to another network configuration,
another zone. This would have made it possible to maintain
the network ID of the mobile unit constant in each network.
Therefore, we conclude that the combination of Harrison,
Freitas and Benjamin would have made obvious the invention of
claim 1, and we affirm the Examiner's rejection based on said
combination under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
2. Rejection of Claim 2 over Harrison and Freitas
With respect to claim 2, the Examiner contends that the
combination of Harrison and Freitas makes obvious the
invention of claim 2 [answer, page 6].
Appellants again do not argue the combination of Harrison
and Freitas, but merely discuss the Harrison reference alone.
According to the Appellants, as the mobile unit moves, the
network ID of the mobile unit within the LAN is changed, which
is contrary to the invention of claim 2 [brief, page 2].
-10-
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007