Appeal No. 1997-2987
Application No. 08/190,389
with different SECS protocols, there is no showing that such SECS protocol conversion would require
more than a mere substitution of a SECS interface for the interface of Cornwell. There may be good
reasons why the artisan reading Cornwell and armed with the knowledge of SECS interfaces would not
or could not have been led to employ a SECS interface in the Cornwell system but appellant has
presented no such reasons for our consideration. In light of what we perceive to be a prima facie
showing by the examiner of the obviousness of employing a SECS protocol conversion in the Cornwell
system, the mere argument by appellant that the references do not teach protocol conversion with
different SECS protocols is not persuasive.
Accordingly, we will sustain the rejection of claim 28 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
CONCLUSION
We have sustained the rejection of claim 28 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 but we have not sustained
the rejection of claims 1 through 27, 29 and 30 under 35 U.S.C.§ 103.
Accordingly, the examiner’s decision is affirmed-in-part.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be
extended under 37 CFR § 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007