Appeal No. 1997-0895
Application 08/286,107
immaterial since they are not prohibited by the claim
language. See In re Self, 671 F.2d 1344, 1350, 213 USPQ 1, 5
((CCPA 1982).
Appellants argue “Thus in Hedberg et al all four
data paths EITHER employ the HIPPI protocol and are parallel
wire cable connectors OR they are fiber optic cables.” (Reply
brief-page 3.)
A look at Hedberg reveals the following language:
While the example embodiment is based upon 32-bit
data paths employing parallel wire cable connectors
for the paths 15-18, a fibre optic connection could
also be used. (Column 4, lines 15-18.) (Emphasis
added.)
We find that this language does not require all four
paths to be EITHER wire cable OR fiber optic as articulated by
Appellants. Nor, on the other hand, does the cited language
suggest two paths be wire cable and the other two paths be
fiber optic, as proffered by the Examiner. If the Examiner’s
position were specifically recited in Hedberg, we would have a
situation of anticipation as opposed to obviousness. We find
that Hedberg does suggest some variation in material (i.e.,
composition) of the connecting paths. And, we agree with the
6-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007