Appeal No. 1997-0921
Application 08/038,577
discussed in the specification at the top of page 16, for example. The claimed levels in the
preamble of the independent claims on appeal are discussed initially at the middle of page
5, the top of page 6, the objects of the invention at the middle of page 8, and at least at the
middle of page 13, for example. Note also the depiction of the various levels in Figure 1.
With respect to the generating step and clause of claims 1 and 9 on appeal, the discussion
of the operation of Figures 10 and 11 at pages 16 and 17 appear to be most pertinent.
Similarly, as to the generating step of independent claim 6 on appeal, the discussion with
respect to the parameter values at pages 18 and 19 appear to be most pertinent. Finally,
we observe that a detailed study of the specification and drawings as filed also reveals to
the reader the feature of obtaining flow from a pointer in dependent claim 2, obtaining a
body corresponding to that flow in claim 3, obtaining procedure calls of claim 4 and
additional bodies in claim 5, the discussion of lexical scoping in claim 7, and the
overwriting of default values in claim 8.
Although the specification is written in a rather abstract, concept-oriented manner, it
is addressed to the artisan as the artisan was defined earlier. We conclude, therefore, that
the artisan would have been enabled to make and use the presently claimed invention with
only a routine degree and certainly not an undue amount of experimentation to make and
use the presently claimed invention. It is clear from the subject matter of the claims on
appeal that a database environment is required even though the specific type disclosed,
OODB, is not specifically recited in the claims. From an artisan's perspective the teaching
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007