Appeal No. 1998-0527
Application No. 08/344,325
of whether the examiner has properly interpreted the teachings
of Hoover and the scope of claim 10.
Appellants argue that Hoover does not teach
periodically broadcasting one or more invalidation reports,
grouping objects into one or more groups, or validity checking
without object-by-object comparison as recited in claim 10
[brief, pages 4-5].
Although the examiner simply states that these steps are
performed in Hoover, we agree with appellants that Hoover does
not support the teachings attributed to it by the examiner.
We have carefully considered the specific portions of
Hoover identified by the examiner as well as the rest of the
document, and we are unable to find the teachings alleged to
be there by the examiner. We basically agree with each of
appellants’ arguments regarding why the recitations of claim
10 are not taught or suggested by Hoover. The examiner does
not respond to appellants’ arguments, but merely repeats the
broad assertion that all the features of claim 10 are met by
Hoover. Since the examiner has not explained how he
interprets the claim language to find the recitations present
in Hoover, and since we are unable to find teachings within
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007