Ex parte OLSON et al. - Page 6

               Appeal No. 1996-0331                                                                                               
               Application 08/239,942                                                                                             

                      It is noteworthy that the examiner states that in Hawkins data is changed and a spreadsheet is              

               updated or altered (see Answer, pages 4 and 6), and avoids declaring that Hawkins explicitly teaches               

               altering an existing data structure as claimed.  Indeed, our close review of Hawkins reveals that an               

               "Excel spreadsheet and graph" are "updated" and Hayes teaches that "data was changed" (Hayes, page                 

               4), but Hawkins never explicitly discloses that a data structure was altered.  The updating of a                   

               spreadsheet in Hawkins is the same as changing data, and not altering data structure as required by the            

               claims on appeal.  Thus altering a data structure is an unstated step which neither exists as a matter of          

               scientific fact nor flows naturally from the elements expressly disclosed in Hawkins.  In this instance, the       

               portions of Hawkins relied upon by the examiner (see page 4, third paragraph; abstract, line 3), merely            

               establish a possibility regarding what may have resulted in the prior art.                                         

                      Claims 1 and 31 on appeal further require altering data structure by testing whether "requested             

               changes" can be made using a "change definition language" by changing a catalog data structure using a             

               "change statements" (see language of claims 1 and 31 on appeal).  Because we find that Hawkins does                

               not anticipate the claims based on a failure to teach changing a data structure, we also find that Hawkins         

               fails to explicitly or inherently disclose the features of making changes in a data structure using change         

               statements, change signals, and a change definition language.                                                      

                      We are not persuaded by the examiner’s argument that even though "the verbiage is not                       

               identical," Hawkins teaches "receiving a list of change statements" at pages 2 and 4 of the reference              


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

Last modified: November 3, 2007