Ex parte SCHOFIELD et al. - Page 3




           Appeal No. 1997-1933                                                                      
           Application No. 08/299,715                                                                


                 The prior art references of record relied upon by the                               
           examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:1                                           
           Oracle RDBMS, SQL Language Reference Manual, Version 7.0, May                             
           1992, pp. 5-101 to 5-105 and 5-314 to 5-320. (Oracle SQL)                                 
           Oracle RDBMS, Database Administrator's Guide, Version 7.0, May                            
           1992, chapters 1, 12, 14, and 26. (Oracle DBA)                                            
                 Claims 12 and 13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as                            
           being unpatentable over Oracle SQL and Oracle DBA.                                        
                 Reference is made to the Examiner's Answer (Paper No. 14,                           
           mailed September 30, 1996) for the examiner's complete                                    
           reasoning in support of the rejections, and to appellants'                                
           Brief (Paper No. 13, filed July 1, 1996) and Reply Brief                                  
           (Paper No. 15, filed November 13, 1996) for appellants'                                   
           arguments thereagainst.                                                                   
                                              OPINION                                                
                 We have carefully considered the claims, the applied                                
           prior art references, and the respective positions articulated                            
           by appellants and the examiner.  As a consequence of our                                  



                 1The examiner lists several references in the prior art section of the              
           Answer which were not actually relied upon in the rejection of the claims                 
           under appeal.  We have considered only those references that were applied                 
           against the appealed claims.                                                              
                                                 3                                                   





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007