Appeal No. 97-1265
Application 07/981,274
Perlman multicast distribution network with an addressing
scheme of the type taught by Cree. The examiner asserts that
the Cree addressing scheme “would increase the reliability of
the Perlman system by assuring that unique multicast addresses
are assigned to the data stream (or messages)” [answer, page
7]. We are unpersuaded by this rationale because the data
streams in Perlman are already given unique multicast
addresses so that no modification for this purpose is
suggested. Additionally, Cree deals with assigning unique
addresses to the nodes of the network, and not to selecting
and assigning a unique multicast address to a specific data
stream. Thus, appellant is correct that there is no
suggestion within the applied prior art to make the
modifications proposed by the examiner. The only reason to
combine the teachings of Perlman with those of Cree would be
based on an improper attempt to reconstruct appellant’s
invention in hindsight.
Appellant also argues that even if the teachings of
Perlman and Cree are combined, the limitations of independent
claim 1 are still not met by the collective teachings of these
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007