Appeal No. 1997-1238
Application 08/169,570
scribed therein, and equivalents thereof, to the extent that
the specification provides such disclosure."
As disclosed in the specification, we find that the
means recited in claims 17 through 24 correspond to the dis-
closed
computer system structure for doing these functions. There-
fore,
we find that the claims are not directed to a computer listing
or to descriptive material but are indeed directed to a com-
puter performing these functions and thereby are directed to
statutory subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and the claims
particularly point out the invention as required under 35
U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph. Therefore, we will not sus-
tain the Examiner's rejection of claims 17 through 24 under 35
U.S.C. §§ 101 and 112. Claims 1 through 29 stand re-
jected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102 as being anticipated by Van de Lavoir. Appellants argue
on page 6 of the brief that Van de Lavoir does not teach,
suggest or disclose dynamic data links between documents or
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007