Appeal No. 1998-1734
Application No. 07/508,024
Perhaps it would have been more accurate, in claim 46, to recite
that the computer readable storage medium encoded with a computer
program comprises means for “causing” or “allowing” a
configuration space data structure to be maintained and signals
indicating the change in conditions to be received. However,
since the artisan would be able to ascertain what is meant from
the disclosure, together with the artisan’s own knowledge, we
will not sustain the rejection of claims 46-53 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, second paragraph.
We now turn to the rejection of all the claims under 35
U.S.C. § 101.
The previous Board decision, as well as the vacated Federal
Circuit's decision, was based on large part, on an analysis of
the claimed subject matter using the “Freeman-Walter-Abele”
test.1 Under the first part of that test for statutory subject
matter, claims are analyzed to determine whether a mathematical
algorithm is either directly or indirectly recited. Under the
second step of the two-part test, if the claims directly or
indirectly recite
1See In re Freeman, 573 F.2d 1237, 197 USPQ 464 (CCPA 1978);
In re Walter, 618 F.2d 758, 205 USPQ 397 (CCPA 1980);
In re Abele, 684 F.2d 902, 214 USPQ 682 (CCPA 1982).
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007