Appeal No. 1997-4222
Application 08/182,886
into a single database and the records in that single database
may be partially or completely read in a single access.
Representative independent claim 2 is reproduced as
follows:
2. A computerized method for obtaining data from
multiple databases in a single access, comprising:
providing multiple databases, each for storing data in
the form of records;
reading a record from each of the multiple databases;
merging the several records read from the databases into
a single multiple bit word within a combined database, the
multiple bit word having a format such that the several
records are accessible from the multiple bit word; and
reading part or all of the multiple bit word in the
combined database in a single access.
The examiner relies on the following reference:
Milden 5,421,728 Jun. 6, 1995
(filed Mar. 7,
1994)
Claims 2 through 6 stand rejected under the judicially
created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting over
claim 1 of Milden.1
Appellants erroneously state that the rejection is under 35 U.S.C. § 101. However, that1
(continued...)
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007